Hamilton to serve 5 place grid penalty for gear box change in China

It's easy to pretend Lewis is a bad driver who just happens to be in the best car... blah blah blah. Everyone said the same about Seb at RedBull... so on and so forth.

Lewis is a great driver, I think he's proven that. Assuming he starts 6th...let's just say he does get that spot... let's say he does have a great start... he's certainly had them before and Ferrari has certainly had some bad ones (Kimi-Bahrain) it's not at all improbable that he'll could take second. If Nico sits first... he'll ride off into the sunset. I'm still not sure Ferrari has enough to flat out beat Merc.

 

I wouldn't rule Hamilton out of the race win, even if Rosberg is leading after the first lap! - It all depends on which driver gets his car set up the best for the circuit, and which driver the track suits best.

Having said that, stuff the pair of them!: C'mon Seb!, C'mon Kimi!

 

+1 agree. Could see Ricciardo possibly P3.

 

I'm ruling out Hambone from a win. Rosberg, Vettel, Raikkonen, Grosjean, Bottas will all be ahead of him, at least. So even if he gets a good start, I don't see him getting into the top 3 right away. MAYBE he finishes on the podium, but def not a win.

 

With the engine he's got and the very long back straight, that would be quite an achievement. I fear the Renault and Honda engined cars will be sitting ducks in China.

I'm hopeful Ferrari won't be at too much of a deficit, but I still see the works Mercedes team having a huge advantage here.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

I think unless Hamilton has a problem with his car he will he will be balls out in qualifying to make sure he starts no lower than 5th or 6th. Then then fun starts and I hope Seb and Kimi can spoil Mercs party, we need a win bad and here is hoping HAAS can carry on with their momentum.

 

Personally, I find that penalising a driver by pushing him back on the grid because his car needed some component changed is very unfair.

I will never understand or approve of these rules.

I am not speculating if Hamilton can or cannot overcome that handicap; this is not the point.

The fact is that a driver (Hamilton or anyone else) is penalised for a technical failure beyond his control. How can that be right?

This is not because Hamilton has committed a fault, but because teams are allocated a quota of engines and transmissions for the season.

They should find a way to penalise the team (a fine perhaps), but not the driver, IMO.

I have no doubt that Hamilton will start the Chinese |GP with the bit between his teeth, and may provide us an outstanding performance to be remembered.

 

I think some of you are incorrectly assuming Lewis will be starting 5th.
he WILL start lower than 5th. Even if he quals 1st, a five place grid penalty drops him down to 6th. If Nico beats him on qual, Lewis will start 7th. And this is all assuming no one else quals higher than Hamilton.

 

Some days I can't spell my own name much less add.

 

I think the requirement for engines and gearboxes to last was to prevent customer teams further down the grid having to buy everything new every race - something they couldn't afford. The grid penalty affects the front runners more than it does the back of the grid, so it encourages the manufacturer teams to make far more reliable components. If it was only a fine, they'd design everything for maximum performance and to only last one weekend before it blows up, so they'd just pay to change it every round.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

+1...this season may prove interesting simply by some of the circumstances early on. Rosberg is firmly in control at this point, but the beauty in that is that it forces Hamilton to focus on racing and work hard at his craft.

I thought he was a little too laid back last season, which only contributed to the angst among viewers and fans (and this forum). A little humbling to start the season will certain change that.

 

I've hated this component penalty crap from day one. It's just another way to artificially mix up the field. Teams also strategically limit the damage using certain races anyway. Give X this X that. They use it when they use it.

 

This kind of grid penalty completely screws up the driver's chances in most cases.

I was laughing at it last year because the McHonda didn't have a chance anyway, but when one of the main protagonists get relegated because of a component failure, I don't think it's good.

Also, I take your point about pretending to help the lesser teams, but that could be achieved by other means without destroying a race.

I am for an unlimited supply of components anyway; call me a dreamer ...

 

+1


That's the word I was looking for: ARTIFICIAL..

 

I just want a clean race. No accidents, safety cars, etc... it especially be nice to see both Ferraris race to their potential.

 

It's all about clean-air for both Merc and Ferrari, IMO. If Ros beats everyone to T1, he'll be gone. If we (Ferrari) beat any Merc to T1, we can hold 'em off until first pit-stop rotation. Then, the strategies will play-out. Gonna be difficult, but we really need to capitalize on the start if we are going to be flanking only 1 Merc when the lights go out.

 

Yep. If we can qualify 3/4 that gets bumped up to 2/3 so there's a front row start for Kimi/Vettel and the other one can strategically place their car so Hamilton can't pass on the first lap and let a gap build.

 

Don't worry - I made the same mistake earlier!

I'm putting Mine down to a software issue causing a brain valve failure with slow speed thinking!

All the best, f̶i̶l̶l̶, f̶h̶i̶l̶l̶, Phill!

 

I agree, unlimited components would certainly show you where the limit of performance was on a race by race basis. I also agree that assisting the customer teams should have been accomplished in a different way - I just don't know what that different way should be. Any ideas?

LOL! I needed a laugh, thanks f̶i̶l̶l̶ f̶h̶i̶l̶l̶ Phill!

All the best,
Andrew.

 

Maybe we should look at a maximum price tag for the engines? Say $1/2M per engine?

That could also prevent an arms race between engine builders, if they know they have to sell them at a fixed price.

And the customers would have to look after their engines and make them last if they wish to limit their costs.

 

Or a carefully mistighted bolt somewhere? "Faulty" torque wrench?

 

I wonder how his strategy would play out if he avoids the Super Softs entirely.

 

The moderation discussion has been split off into its own thread to prevent it from overwhelming this one:

http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/f1/519234-split-hamilton-china-grid-penalty-thread.html​

All the best,
Andrew.

 

Great idea as usual.

Gregg