Doesn't Senna Have The Answer . . .

Aren't these statements by Senna the answer to all of this bickering about Hamilton at Spa??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ko94oniszuA

All of this talk about Hamilton making "better decisions" or being "too optimisitic" seems like true tuesday-morning quarterbacking at its worst.

These drivers have to make split-second decisions. Who knows if there will be another opportunity "on the next straight." That is too cerebral and is one of the problems with F1 - IMHO of course.

I know rules are rules. But many of you die hard tifosi are judging Lewis a bit too harshly for just making a racing decision.

"When you see a gap, you take it . . ." End of story - no excuses.

 

Owned!

 

Had the exact same words been said by Lewis, the usual dickheads would have said that he came across as Argonaut But its true what Senna said, and its all about the heat of the battle and seizing the moment.

 

yea, but thats Senna, and this is Hamilton. and there wasn't a gap.

 

Sure, you can seize the moment, but if it breaks the rules then you have to accept the outcome. Seems to me that an intelligent driver is one that can make the right decisions in the heat of battle.

 

IMO this shows that Jackie Stewart is stupid. Every racer should have this attitude. It's why Senna was loved.

 

When you are driving what is considered the most expensive and advanced race car, and you are paid millions to do so, and you have the responsibility of not causing harm to yourself and your fellow competitors, you MUST make better decsions. And you don't just jump into a gap just because you see it, or you find yourself destroying equipment, possibly hurting someone, or worse yet pulling a Gilles and killing yourself.

Champions think, Stewart, Lauda, Prost. Colorful drivers are not around for long.

 

While I am not a fan of JS, the point that is missed is that contact is far more possible in Senna's period of racing then it was in Stewart's or the previous GP champions. The cars have continued to develop in terms of speed (shorter decision times) and safety (you walk away after a mistake). It is inevitable that there will be more contact based on these factors. From Stewart's view, in his day you could not get away with contact like Senna did, so Stewart knew not to take the same chances with his life or that of his competitor. I don't believe that is shows Stewart is stupid, just that F1 has moved on and his perspective has not.

 

There's a lot of validity to Senna's comments, but like anything they need to be measured. There is no such thing as black and white, and that's evidenced by the furor over how punishment was meted in Hamilton's case. I tend to side with Ayrton's "If you're going to make an omelet, you're going to break a few eggs" philosophy. It's racing, and without saying that you should be taking careless risks, there is far too much of a conservate "bring it home" mentality with today's pricey machinery and big stakes. Kimi used to be the guy that gave us that "go for it" feeling, but that seems to be gone. He couldn't hold off Hamilton at the end of the race, and when Lewis got by him (doesn't matter how) he lost it trying to regain the lead. Granted it was in the rain, but conditions were equal. Everyone talks about the Ferrari being the class of the field, and Hammy knows that. He also knows that to overtake the Ferrari will require some spectacular efforts. That said, I think the question we should be asking is:

Why did Ferrari's former #1 driver and defending World Champion let Hamilton back in the race, making this whole scenario possible? Was he cruising, hoping to preserve the car? Well, it cost him a win, a championship and his status within the team.

 

1st Senna era is not the same as current F1 era.

Taking a short cut and not slowing down straight after is too harsh? Wow. Why didn't he just use his brakes? If there was a wall at the corner he would of crashed into it, if there was a sandtrap, he would of prob beached himself or broken the car, watch the in-car video, he turns into the corner sees that Kimi is still next to him and decides half way in to cut the corner. Yes that is all split sec decisions Senna is talking about but that's isn't the issue here. We ain't judging him on that. It's what he did next which is the problem.

He should of instantly let Kimi pass again since he "cut the corner and gained a spot unfairly" but what does he do? He accelerates and goes thru 3, 1-2-3 gears x 19000rpm before he lets Kimi retake the lead for all of 3secs before he passed him again, he didn't really let Kimi have the spot back, more so he made him work for it, which wouldn't of happened had he taken the corner properly, braking behind Kimi thus losing momentum etc. That is the issue!!!!

The rules about cutting corners and what you should do to avoid a drive through penalty have been around for a long time now, we ain't talking about a technicality here that they stumble upon once a year, its part of the rules the drivers discuss each race weekend, I guess he decided to reinterpret them differently to suit his needs and maximise his advantage and his bandwagon of followers are doing the same.

His team is also equally to blame for not getting on the radio ASAP and telling him to give up the spot and try again next straight(since Lewis decided to accelerate). They been in this game for far to long to know that **** doesn't sit well with the stewards. If you read what Ron Dennis said after the race he makes it out like they had a mother's meeting with Charlie about what Lewis just did was legit but you watch the footage they had all of 10secs to communicate with Lewis and they failed him. The team is there to make those decisions that the racer doesn't have time to make. Lewis is there to race, the team is there to support him and make sure he is following the rules and if he does break a rule or trip up be able to pass that information to him quickly so he doesn't get a penalty.

Ron Dennis failed Lewis.

Gilles27: You make it sound like the tyre degradation/carsetup/engine outputs/brakes/wing settings/etc were equal between the Ferrari and the McLaren. Had Lewis not cut the corner maybe the situation would of been different but Lewis robbed us of that.

 

Yep I agree as I'm not sure what was happening with Kimi, in his head, or his car that allowed Lewis to closeup the gap so rapidly. Watching the race I said to myself "Kimi why did you not protect the inside line instead of watching your mirror's and weaving"? I'm all about Ferrari but imho Lewis deserved the win.

 

Track conditions changed due to rain, and it seemed the McLaren was handling the wet better than the Ferrari.

 

Just as he did in China last year

 

I'm pretty sure he was reeling him in before the rain began to fall.

 

Maybe it should be. I mean listen to the man . . . We have not had a personality like that in the sport since he passed away. HE IS JUST WHAT OUR WITHERING SPORT NEEDS!!! Not more rules, regulations, ECU flashes, computer controlled cars and stewards that start their own inquiries after watching the race on TV just like the rest of us. Bring back the Senna days - it hasn't been the same since.

"Woulda, coulda, shoulda." You make it sound so easy. Yeah, just let him by - but nor for 3 seconds, it had better be for at least 5, or maybe 6 seconds. Maybe that would please the stewards. Hell, why not let him get a lap up before you go after him? Maybe we should put a sign in the cars that says "if you gain an advantage then be sure to let your opponent pass you and get a nice gap before trying to pass again. If there are any questions, read rule 229344.000114 of the FIA regs." I'm sure that would have helped Lewis remember that rule and follow it scrupulously - all while going 140 mph, during the final 2 laps at Spa, IN THE FREAKING RAIN! Problem solved.

Ludicrous.

Not anyone could live up to the standards you set - not even the best scuderia drivers. Schumi sure didn't. He would have done the same thing Lewis did - or worse. Sounds like you want a "machine" driving the car - not a living, breathing human being with passion, emotion and imperfection. Why do we even have drivers then? If they are always supposed to make these perfect decisions all the time, why not just let the cars drive themselves. They damn hear already do any way.

 

excellent post, exactly how i saw it. If he would have braked properly and tucked in behind Kimi through the chicane, he would have not been nearly as close as he was.

 

Did you say the same thing, Ron, when Massa stuck his nose on the inside of Coulthard in Australia? He had not a hope in hell of making the pass. He wasn't even with Coulthard, he wasn't even half way up Coulthards car, and he stuck his nose in there and caused a collision.

What about the rain-soaked race where Massa spun the car - what - 5 or 6 times? Was he acting responsibly and taking care? Was Kimi when he overdrove the car and smacked the wall? Schumacher did the same as Lewis did this weekend and was never penalized for it - actually, Schumi didn't even give back the position! So Schumi was an inexperienced driver who didn't live up to his responsibility to make good decisions as a highly paid race driver?

Come on - this avenue of criticism to Hamilton is just silly.

 

If every driver braked 'properly' and 'tucked in behind' the car in front at every corner we'd have a procession from beginning to end. The sport is racing and the objective is to finish in front of the opposition and unless your car starts at the front that involves passing, which usually happens on corners!

 

That is not what i meant. If there was a wall at the chicane instead of a run-off, Hamilton would have had to brake and tuck in behind Kimi because he was unsuccessful at getting past him. If he did that he would have lost a bit of time and would not have been drag racing kimi to the next corner beside him. He would have been a few car lengths behind him. After watching the onboard camera, Hamilton made no attempt to stay on the circuit. If he did, it would have costed him a few tenths. In turn, he gained a small advantage but an advantage none the less going into the hairpin.

At least that is my take on the situation.

 

not quite the end of the story. if you are going to use quotes, you should at least write what the person says. Specially if you are a lawyer. Let me correct you.
"If you no longer go for a gap, that exists, you are no longer a racing driver".

lewis had no gap. that's why he ended up off track. end of story-no excuses.

 

The whole arguement is irrelevant. The issue is with the rules not with whether there was a gap or not.

 

..one day they will be saying, '...but that's Hamilton, and this is 'insert name'....! I realise it's difficult for the lovers of the 'horsey' to realise that their arch enemy McLaren has the worlds best driver...but during Senna's day it was the same. Hamilton will be the top of the tree for a v-e-r-y long time.

 

.....you must be joking...right, tell me you're joking. So you want a driver to be controlled from the pits. I know, let's remove the driver altogether and have the cars run by radio control. Or, let's tell all the racing drivers that they must take into account other drivers weakness's and failings, and then make sure they don't take advantage of that.....wouldn't seem fair would it. You are probably the same sort of individual that doesn't want prizes awarded at school track and field days because it might make some kids feel 'inferior'. Why don't we just ban motor 'racing' altogether....so that some poor inadequate driver doesn't stand the risk of having his feelings hurt. Why don't we make sure that racing cars can't exceed 30mph, so that the driver will have more 'time' to be able to assess just how much of a lead he must allow the other driver after each corner.....couldn't be seen to actually attempt a pass too quickly can he...? Sometimes I can't believe that people actually think the way you do...

 

What say you about the gap LH had gifted to him by Kimi going into La Source? Should he not have gone for the position?

 

And if you knew anything about the law then you would understand that everything is open to interpretation.

Who are you to define what a "gap" is when you weren't in the cockpit racing? Is "gap" defined in the regulations? If Lewis thought there was a gap, then he damn well should have tried to take it. Your opinion - from the comfort of your couch - means nothing. I am just going off of what I saw him do - go for a gap that he believed was there. The gap "exists" when you create it. That is what Senna was saying. He didn't mean that you have to take a vote on it before you make the move. You have to make a split-second decision and then act. That is what makes a champion. That was Senna.

Like Senna, Lewis races to win. Unlike Massa who admitted that he had pulled back just to stay in the WDC race and Kimi who only wakes up for 10 laps in the middle. Yeah, why not hand those guys a win and rob Lewis Hamilton for trying to pass in a gap that didn't exist - by wetpet's definition.

And bad form bringing up my being a lawyer. Why make this personal?