Official French Formula 1 Grand Prix Thread

That's why I miss the good old days when Qualifying really means Qualifying. The current format does nothing to show the true potential of the drivers and their cars.

 

dissapointed that Sato blew his engine so soon. =/ Go BAR Honda! Good job to Ferrari though. 4 stops.

 

Sorry no. Watched it in London.

 

I heard that. But I also noticed that MS came in on laps 11, 29, 42, and 58. A "mathematical" 4-stop would be 14, 28, 42, and 56. Looks like they snookered the field into pitting early. Michael's laps looked impressive, but everyone else was running heavy on fuel and trying to stretch 20 laps out of their tires.
Alonso still has to work on his interviews, but I got the impression he felt that they had made a mistake trying to respond to a Ferrari strategy that they couldn't figure out.

The weird thing is that, when RB hadn't made a move by the end of lap 68, I was thinking, "Eveyone's going to back off once Michael crosses the line ... but Renault wouldn't fall for that, would they?"

I got the impression from RB's interview that he wasn't happy with the move, as it was "risky". Podiums are nice, but it was only worth one point. A crash could have cost him five. If they had been the last three cars on the lead lap, then go for it, as a crash would still leave him 5th with 4 pts. Risk one to gain one, good. But with ten cars still on the lead lap, it could have cost them all five. I wonder if he went to Trulli after the race and told him "I vas jus followink orders".

But SC didn't show the turn prior to the pass. If Trulli got really sloppy there, it would open a huge barn door for the pass. But it didn't look all that open, and it's good that Trulli didn't try to pull an MS "chop" on Rubens, or we'd have been talking about RB's "kamakazi" move, and both Rubens and Jarno could have been out of the points. Good call on Trulli's part.

Which two drivers have won races this year? Michael and ...

Champions are consistent. Which drivers have scored points in all but one race? Michael, Button, and Trulli.
Which driver has scored points in every race this year? Rubens. (The driver that tends to avoid "risky" moves.)
Which four drivers are leading in points? Ayup. Michael, Rubens, Button and Trulli.

 

It is not all about the drivers, the teams, the cars and specially the ruber, play a lot in F1.

I have to say that other drivers will be leading if their cars were more reliable, and their teams more experinced. As MS said yesterday 'no Risk no Fun', but he can say that with his team and his car. I am sure FA also shares that view, but unffortunatelly his car breaks and his team also makes mistakes.

One sad thing about F1, is that drivers that does not takes risk nor have the skills, can score points with ease. And if you don't agree, look what happend at the US GP.

One big factor this year seems to be the tires, and I wonder if F1 won't more competitive if every team were forced to use the same tires.

- Julio.

 

The interview sounded like a big lie to me too....I think the trueth might be that they were on a 4 stop, but might try 3 depending on position.

 

Ross Brawn's interview shed some light on this: He said, that Luca (forgot the last name) came up with the 4 stop idea early in the weekend once they got the data numbers from the first few practice runs.

It sounded as if they had this at least as a game plan in the back of their head all along. However the decision to actually do it came early in the race when they wanted to give MS room to run.

 

I don't know if it was a "lie", per se. I think they got everyone to copy their early stops, and figured that if they were out front, they'd just cruise along with a long third stretch, too.
Around the second stop, they noted that they needed to cash in the speed edge from a faster third and fourth segments, with a splash and dash between.

That, or Michael was just showing off.

 

What are you? ... motorracing is all about taking risks, not some high speed form of accountancy.

That is the most rediculous, unexciting cr@p I have ever read.

- RB has so many points because his car is fast and reliable thus he can cruise around and pick up points. If his car was like the others he would be a nobody.

- Trulli also has a good car this year, but the difference is that Alonso is making it dance and impressing everybody with sheer speed ... Trulli is just going around in circles and getting points, but F1 team managers do not hire slow and non-risk taking drivers otherwise all Volvo owners in the world would be F1 drivers!

No wonder F1 is boring if these are the modern form of fans. Please take in some history of all forms of motorsport and realise that what makes Fangio, Jim Clark, Stirling Moss, Nuvolari, MS, Senna, Prost, Stewart, Lauda, Andretti, Peterson, etc. great is they could find speed in their car that others couldn't. They could raise their game and every single lap they were taking risks to get the amazing lap speed out of their car ... they were taking risks to be winners NOT just points getters.

Yes Trulli won Monaco ... big deal, he qualified well and then drove a non-threatened race. He needs to learn to grab opportunities when they are there no matter how slim and drive the cr@p out of himself to make them happen ... that is what Champions do! 1957 German GP, Fangio did not just carefully drive around hoping the 2 Ferraris leading would fall off or slow so he could catch them ...NO!, he grabbed that car by it's balls and threw it around the Nurburgring, shattering lap records and caught the 2 Ferraris ... Fangio said afterwards that he scared himself in that race, because he took huge risks. That is a Champion, somebody that could push himself to new levels ... RB and Trulli cannot do that, period!

Pete likes motor racing not consistency tests
BTW: Do you understand why MS is so fast?. It is not because he carefully drives around the track!. No it is because his car control ability allows him to drive around that much closer to the limit than all other drivers. His ability enables him to do this lap after lap after lap. RB and others maybe able to do this for one or 2 laps, but MS can do this for the whole race. In other words MS is taking risks every single corner, pushing that car (without stressing it) closer to its limit ... MS is the current risk master.

 

You obviously did not watch the French Grand Prix! Rubens pushed hard to get from 10th position on the grid to 3rd on to the podium. Did you see that last lap? (rhethorical question: No need to answer!!!!!). Saying Rubens takes no risks is ignorance. he could have lost P4 and ended up in 6th or 7th had he spun off the track.

Rubens is driving like the great race driver he is. He would have been able to push Michael for first place had it not been for his troubles in pre qualifying that led him to go out first in qualifying. Since he went out so ealry in qualifying, he was essentially a sweeper trying to clean up the track for everyone else to follow. Rubens did well to exceptionally well to get from 10th to 3rd.

Rubens is a great racing driver only second to the greatest racing driver of all time, Michael Schumacher. He answered all those critics and shut them up once again.

I don't care if F1 is boring for you. I am enjoying seeing the greatest team, developing the greatest cars for the greatest F1 driving duo ever. This is history in the making and I am fortunate enough to witness this.

On to Silverstone and more Ferrari victories!!!

 

Championships are exactly a high speed form of accountancy.

There are risk takers littering the sides of race tracks (and special stages) all over the world.

In order to finish first, you must first finish.

There are no points for "gutsy try".

Now maybe if Mad Max wants to push through "style points" in the championship, ...
... everyone would hate the East German judge.

If you want to see drivers pulling flashy "look at me" moves, you should be watching F3000 (or other spec-racing series).

 

Look I agree with you must finish stuff, but if you never take a risk in motor sport you will never succeed. Infact if you never take a risk in life you will never succeed.

You obviously did not understand my MS comments about how he pushes the limits every single lap ... that is called a calculated risk. RB doesn't and that is why he is slow.

Passing always involves taking a risk. Have a look back at MS's career that man has taken more risks that everybody else on the grid and look where he is. Yes he has learnt to take risks where only necessary but you do have to take a risk to be a racing driver.

Thus I will end this before it gets ugly and agree to disagree. The amount of risk taking is proportional to the length of a race. In short sprint club races if you want to win you have to take many risks because you have only got about 5 laps to get to the front. At the opposite end is a 24 hour race like Le Mans. For 23.5 hours of that race it is about your lap time and keeping you car clean and perfect. If you have a chance of winning in the last 1/2 hour then it is time for pedal to the metal ...

In the end if you are not hungry for a win you should not be in F1 ... that hunger for a win requires that you take a few risks in your race otherwise you will be left behind by the driver that is prepared to take those risks!

Pete's opinion
ps: Gee I wish we could wind back the clock to the 60's and once again have racing drivers with BALLS and supporters too

 

Agree. I was talking about the whole season not this race. I applaud RB for taking this chance. That is what he is paid to do IMO.

Again concrats RB.

Pete's opinion
ps: Somebody said that he was pushed by the team to have a go at this pass (?) ... if that is the case and he was unhappy about taking the risk then ... hmmm, well hopefully after this successful pass he will see you can gain from a risk and will try many more calculated ones ... ?

 

Pete

I noticed that a couple of laps prior to the finish of the race Rubens had a look at Trulli at that very same corner. I think i was a gutsy pass in that area but it was also a smart one as there was very little room to retaliate prior to the finish line.

At Indy Rubens was pushing Micheal hard after his last stop, the same in Canada. Rubens knows how to race hard and i feel that the last 3 races will be that shot of confidence that he needs to take the fight to Micheal.

I have a feeling that in a couple of races that Micheal will have the championship in his back pocket and Rubens will be the one taking the point for Ferrari. If it does happen it will not be the greatest for the sport but i think that it is fair payback for being a true #2 driver for the team

Just my 2 cents worth

 

Your comments sound like someone who doesn't understand the dynamics of driving a race car...

You make "driving at the limit" sound like some sort of game of roulette... you throw the car into the corner a little faster and hope you survive. The way you describe MS above, its as-if he's faster than everybody else simply because he's a bigger risk taker, willing to throw the car into a riskier situation, throwing it closer to the limit.

That is sooooo wrong!!!

MS is faster because of his machine-like consistency and precision. His ability to enter a corner at exactly the speed he intends to (not +-2mph; not +-1mph; more like +-1/4mph)... and then he can more accurately monitor the traction of the car... thereby keeping the car closer to the limit of adhesion for a higher percentage of the time than other drivers... not +-5%; not +-2%; rather +-1%.

But more than keeping the car at the limit, MS does a better job of elevating those limits by keeping the car better balanced. He does that by doing a better job of smoothly transitioning from throttle to brake by overlapping the two via left-foot braking. He also does a better job of turning in without upsetting the balance of the car, leveraging trail braking to the fullest extent. By keeping the car better balanced, he is able to maintain higher speeds throughout the corners than other drivers. And with the huge speed-dependent downforces produced by F1 cars, that further elevates the limits.

Via those skills, MS is able to drive the car just fast enough to win, but never any faster... because he's NOT going to take unnecessary risks... he is going to be as easy on the car as possible.

This last weekend, MS didn't get too close to Alonso... as long as Alonso didn't make a big mistake, MS wasn't going to try a risky pass... he wasn't going to stress the car trying to keep himself under Alonso's rear wing preceding every possible passing opportunity. Rather, he hung back a bit, relying on his team in the pit stops and the strategy to allow him to get out into the open with a lighter load such that he can do what he does best... which is to safely and consistently drive the car closer to elevated limits than anyone else, laying down a series of fast laps that put him far enough out in front that he remains there after the team executes a flawless pit stop.

Minimize risk... execute with consistency and precision... reliably maximize points per race... the MS and Ferrari recipe for WDC+WCC. It is Rubens that stepped out of that mold this last week and made a bold pass. Thus, I think your argument above is all wet!

 

Brian,

I agree with all you have said (except your last sentence ), but you all are forgetting one big thing. Driving a car fast is in itself taking a risk. Thus RB and MS could cruise around at 50 mph and NOT take any risks at all.

The fact that MS backs his own ability and is prepared to enter a corner slightly faster than everybody else is in itself a risk ... a mitigated risk because he has belief in his ability that he will control the car.

Motor racing is about risk taking. You would not even race a car if you were not a risk taker ... ie. last time I looked it is dangerous.

I do agree though, that while driving a car and you are in the zone it appears as if the risk is very low, but if you are still pushing and trying to find your limit and your cars limit, you are taking a small risk.

And yes if my post made it sound like I was saying MS is throwing the car wildly into a corner and hoping to get out the other side ... er, I did not mean that .

In the end Brian (and you know this I assume from your tracking of your CS) that improving your lap times involves you as the driver taking on small risks to enter the corner faster or pushing the tyre limits coming out of the corner a bit more ... they are all risks. What usually happens is you feel the car twitch or struggle and your brain notes that and you think to yourself: hmmm, getting close to this cars limit in that corner ... and then you decide what speed you will try that corner at again next lap. If you decide to stay at the same speed you are taking a small but acceptable (to me ) risk.

Motor racing and fast lap times are all about balancing the risks versus completing the race or lap. This is the wonderful thing about the sport as a driver. You are balancing on that limit all the time and every time you rev the engine out to its maximum you are taking a reliability risk, every time you squease the acelerator early out of a corner and feel the car twitch and fight you are taking a risk, every time you brake deep and the car tugs and little over the bumps you are taking a risk ... and right back to the very start of the race as you sit on the grid holding starting revs and you pop the clutch and fight to the first corner twitching this way and that to dodge and pass other cars ... you are taking a risk. It is just a fantastic sport that emotionally puts you in a very alive state. In the end if you did not risk anything you will not be fast enough ... because you did not push yourself and the car.

Pete
ps: I think you guys are all forgetting that every single lap these F1 drivers are working hard with their car on some sort of limit. It looks like the cars are on rails, not because they are not pushing their limits and taking acceptable risks ... but because of the technology of the cars. Go and watch a saloon cars race and the cars are bucking, twitching and diving all over the place ... and much more visible. F1 drivers are still doing all that the cars are simply miles better and the limits are much tighter ... still same challenge and personal battle.

 

Nowadays, everything is a risk. Eating modified foods, driving on roads with speed freaks, and people who aren't paying attention, flying, working in a stressful place, getting shot by anyone who has 50 bucks. You can get killed walking your doggie. F1 and other high speed racing just takes the risk up a few pegs. They know what they do. If they thought what they were doing was dangerous, they wouldn't do it. They think they can do it without getting hurt, so they do. Same with fighter poilts, boxers and men in tights who fly through the air 50 feet high, without nets. I can be an ass at work and know I'm not going to be fired, so I don't think that's risky.
These guys are the same way. The're just on a different level. I don't think I'm going to crash when I race, it's just not in my mind. If things get rough, I focus on moving the car to a safe area, or slowing it down. No fuss no muss.

 

Im just wondering where are all the conspiracy guys telling us how alonso gave the race to ms by slowing down or having a long pit stop. It was quite obvious that trulli gave his position to rb as well. I hate these races with fixed finishes!
All in all I thought this was a great race. I wonder how they have it fixed for next week?

 

Driving around on public roadways is arguably a bigger risk! Does that make all of us great big risk takers? Risk of injury is probably greater in gymnastics than in F1 motor racing. Does that make those 15 year old girls bigger risk takers than MS?

Risk of what? Sticking the car into the armco? Or risk that by adding 1 mph to your entry speed with your now lighter load and hotter tires that you'll be 1/2mph too fast and you won't be able to get on the throttle quite as early to compensate?

At MS levels of precision and awareness and adaptability, he can inch his way up to the limit and the only risk is that he may have to make some adjustments that cost him a couple mph in exit speed. Not really too big a deal unless its a qualifying lap where those tenths might be "painful".

Again, you make it sound like they are driving on the edge of some cliff... go slightly over and they die. In fact, the "limit" of adhesion is a rounded arc... if you go a little over, you just lose a little traction, forcing you to make little adjustments that will cost you time through the corner and speed on the exit of the corner.

Crashes don't happen because someone decided to "risk it" by pushing a little closer to the edge and suddenly going over... crashes happen because of far larger mental breakdowns. OR, in the case of more inconsistent drivers, they get unlucky and have several of their inconsistencies hit in the same direction at the same time creating an error too large to be corrected.

So, again... you see motor racing as a game of risk-taking; I see it as a game of precision and consistency. Drivers who have perfected their ability to sense speed, to sense available traction, to sense the balance of a car, and to see the ideal racing line on a traffic-filled track far ahead of where they are driving.

No, the F1 cars do NOT look like they are on rails... they are hopping around all over. But I still do not see it a game of calculated risks. Rather, the high-technology F1 cars are very predictable in their behavior (when setup properly)... allowing the consistent drivers to navigate the consistent cars around the track to get consistent results. Its not a game of chance... its a game of fine precision.

 

Risk of stuffing up you lap time. I'm never talking about accidents I am talking about lap times and performance ...

Again Brian I am not talking about accidents or falling off the track, I am talking about lap times. To get the fastest lap time you have to keep pushing and pushing until you find that limit. To fast and you will be slow (as you will be untidy), to slow and you will simply be too slow.

Risk taking does not equal crashes ... the goal of a racing driver is to drive the perfect lap, balancing the length of the race, tyres, engine reliability and his lap speed all carefully to get the best out of the car. By taking a corner on the limit he is risking the life of his tyres, by revving the engine right out (if he is in a McLaren ) he is risking the engine's life, etc.

Yes agree with most of that.

Talk to a non-motor racing person ... they find F1 boring because the cars do not show their attitude (we can see it because we know what to look for, they can't).

It is a game of chance, because you do not know exactly the other guys strategy, thus you have to push as hard as you dare (again taking a calculated risk on your tyres, spinning, and engine, etc.). Alonso pushed his car too hard before his second pitstop because the team took a risk to hold him out for a few extra laps ... that risk cost him the race (IMO).

Look at RB's pass of Trulli. RB took the risk of pushing his car hard to push Trulli in the hope that Trulli would stuff up and thus he could get on the podium. Rb could have taken far less risk and just followed him home. Instead he risked his tyres life, etc. to push Trulli. Yes it is a precise came but there are risks involved. RB could have lost all his points, he could have worn his tyres so that he lost lap speed and thus lost a position (probably not, but just trying to explain). It is all about calculated risks on how fast the driver and the car can be pushed to play out the high speed chess game.

Just to clarify. RISK does not equate to DANGER or ACCIDENT to me, but the risk of not finishing or messing up the perfect lap or NOT winning, etc.

I think we are talking the same but just different language. But I still say a racing driver who never takes any risks will be too slow, as he will never have found his limits ...

Pete

 

But that's not risk-taking... as you say, its just as big a risk to go into the corner a bit too slow as it is a bit too fast... either way you may lose the same amount of time to your competitor.

That's true of most any interesting head-to-head sport... baseball you take a risk of throwing a slider vs. a fastball... basketball you take a risk fouling the guy to force a free throw... football, etc. That doesn't make these all games of chance... sure luck and risk and strategy are involved... but they're still dominated by skill, not luck.

And note that only in games of skill will you see true dominance. You'll never see a dominant pro at the roulette wheel... someone who wins 9 out of 10 times for years on end. Games of chance have fairly random results.

Absolutely. But that doesn't justify your comments that being the bigger risk taker is what makes MS fast... here you're talking about the risks inherent in strategies to win WDC/WCC points. And on that topic, consistency and avoiding risk is generally the better tactic. MS is leading because he is incredibly fast. RB is second because he does not take a lot of risks... and consistently scores a fair amount of points.

Pete, we seem to be agreeing on a lot of things... but we seem to be losing the point of discussion: Is MS fastest because he takes more risks than the other drivers? I say, "No"... MS is fastest because he can more consistently drive his car, keeping it better balanced, and closer to a higher limit... and that in fact, this year, MS has taken very VERY few risks (as you're defining risk) relative to the other drivers. Similarly, is Ferrari dominating because they take more risks? Again, I say "No"... they are dominating because they calculate the risks and take the most reliable path to maximizing points.

The other drivers/teams are taking more risks in order to close the skill gap... sometimes it works and they challenge for a while... but they can't get lucky for a whole race (whereas MS can and does drive consistently fast for a whole race)... and it results in major failures during a season (DNFs and DSQs yielding 0 points).

 

Okay I can agree with that with one extra point. How do you think MS found that higher limit every year with the new car, etc?. I believe it is because he was/is prepared to take that extra risk in pushing himself and thus found the cars limit.

At the USGP the news media got real excited because MS spun during practice ... I just thought to myself, yep MS is pushing those boundaries and taking little risks to find that balance of pace that he can get out of the car. If you never, ever take a risk and risk spinning your car then you will always be wondering where the limit really was. Yes I do realise that you can feel the limit getting closer before a loose, but even the great MS sometimes pushes over that limit and looses the car (note in practise sessions because he has brains) in the hunt for that extra 10th of a second.

RB though instead when he feels the car getting close to the edge or limit does not take it any further and thus will never be as fast as MS who is prepared to push it too far and find his new limits.

Think of MS's (and Senna's) brilliance in the wet. That skill does not come from carefully driving around. Over the years they have pushed and pushed and taken more risks in the rain than others and have found a higher level of control ... that others are having nightmares about ... but even Senna and MS fall off sometimes when they are caught out, and then the slow, non-risk takers can all say told you so ... nah nah nah. Problem is MS and Senna have already won more races because of taking calculated risks than the slow brigade, and as long as the risks are small and calculated they will never catch up.

Anyway alot of what I have just said relates to taking risks in developing your skills ... not taking risks when racing. When racing it is a different ball game and I have already discussed that on other posts.

Pete's opinion

 

I didn't see it mentioned previously, so think I should add that Rubens also overtook Sato early on in the race. This was prior to the BAR's engine failure. Going anywhere near Sato's car on track seems, to me, risky enough to consider Rubens pretty damn adventurous.