Early on during this morning’s Japanese Grand Prix, Fernando Alonso overtook Felipe Massa. Massa didn’t make it difficult for Alonso — not that you would expect him to.
Scuderia Ferrari immediately tweeted on their official Twitter account:
I have to admit to doing a little victory dance in my chair at having riled Ferrari enough to provoke them to reply.
I wasn’t being terribly serious with my tweet. It’s not especially that I thought Massa let Alonso through, or even that doing so would be wrong. Nor was my tweet about team orders. It was more about how Alonso can assert his authority at Ferrari.
But it’s interesting that Ferrari are touchy about the suggestion.
All good banter though.
Beneath the jump, an image of the tweet for posterity.
Shortly after the Canadian Grand Prix finished, Bill asked me in the comments what I thought about the latest tangle that Lewis Hamiton has found himself in.
It was another bad race for Hamilton. Two more clumsy clashes were added on top of the controversial incidents in Monaco that are still fresh in the memory.
It is starting to look like a bad habit.
Montreal incidents weren’t so bad
But the thing is, I don’t think either of the incidents in Montreal were nearly as bad as what he got up to in Monaco.
Yes, the move up the inside of Mark Webber at the start was too optimistic. But in the dry it probably would have worked. If you look at Hamilton’s onboard camera shot, Hamilton looks like he is going to make it, but then understeers through a puddle.
It would be right to argue that Hamilton should have taken the conditions into account. So in that respect, it was a dodgy move on Hamilton’s part. But at least he didn’t just steam straight into Webber in stable conditions, as he did to Felipe Massa and Pastor Maldonado in Monaco.
As for the crash with Jenson Button, I think this was an unfortunate racing incident. Hamilton got such better drive than Button, that it is perfectly understandable that he had a go. Plus, the racing line along the pit straight at Montreal effectively goes from the extreme right to the extreme left, back to the right again.
No matter which way Hamilton went, he would have found himself getting squeezed eventually. It was just a bad deal that Button couldn’t see him in his mirrors due to a mixture of bad conditions and confusion. Again, Hamilton should have taken the conditions into account. But, again, at least it wasn’t as malicious as what went on in Monaco.
Why does Hamilton get himself in so much trouble?
It does strike me, though, that Hamilton is taking on far too many of these marginal overtaking attempts. Hamilton has always been a little bit like this, though he had seemed to calm down a bit. His excitable inexperience is no longer an excuse — this is his fifth F1 season. He has more than enough grands prix under his belt to know what’s what.
But what is making him go for all these half gaps? One theory is that he just has to push harder this year to beat Red Bull, and is becoming desperate as a result. Undoubtedly that is part of the problem. But Hamilton had a much worse start to the season in 2009 and he wasn’t quite as clumsy as this then.
If you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver.
Senna was known for his high-risk, sometimes dangerous moves. The key to Senna, though, was that he was often able to intimidate drivers into moving out of his way. Michael Schumacher also had this trait.
It is well known that Hamilton idolises Senna. When Hamilton goes for a half opportunity, you can imagine him repeating the Senna quote to himself in his head.
It’s more than just “going for a gap”
But overtaking is about so much more than simply driving round another car by going faster. You need to assess the situation; analyse what the opposing driver has at stake, work out what he is thinking and how much he will yield. It is effectively a 200mph game of chicken.
Senna and Schumacher managed to balance the scales of this game of chicken massively in their favour by building up a fearsome reputation. They were the hard-chargers who would impose themselves on their opponents through a mixture of speed and aggression. Perversely, this possibly made it easier for them to overtake.
Hamilton, on the other hand, is very quickly building himself the opposite reputation. He is becoming clumsy Lewis — probably about to cause another crash that will be all his fault.
Even in a situation where Hamilton may have the upper hand on track, he may begin to find overtaking more difficult. Hamilton’s reputation is such that even in a racing incident, he could well find himself being blamed for every clash he is involved in. This, in turn, could make his opponents more open to defending more aggressively.
Could it be that in his attempts to become this generation’s Senna, Lewis Hamilton has actually achieved the reverse?
I feel sad. The Monaco Grand Prix was a great race — easily the best of the season so far. At a track notorious for processions, Monaco was producing a corker.
Pirelli’s tyres held up for a change, meaning genuinely good racing through strategy, not cartoon-style degredation. The DRS is little use round here too, meaning it had little effect.
A beautiful move on Schumacher
DRS did play a role. But even so, passing into Sainte Dévote requires a massive pair, whether you have DRS or not. And that is just what Lewis Hamilton did. He pulled off a stunning move on Michael Schumacher that brilliantly caught the veteran off guard.
It was brave, but it was also perfectly judged. Both gave each other racing room. It was just the sort of passing that we want to see in F1.
Hamilton loses the plot against Massa and Maldonado
But sadly it went pear-shaped from there. It seems as though, after completing the move of the season, he seemed to believe he was invincible.
An over-ambitious move on Felipe Massa at the Lowes hairpin was a poor misjudgement. His drive-through penalty echoed that handed out to Paul di Resta who made a similar error.
Having damaged the Ferrari, Hamilton then opted to overtake Massa in the tunnel. It is not news that there is only one line through the dangerous and high-speed tunnel. Hamilton’s move forced the Brazilian onto the marbles and ultimately the barrier.
Then after the re-start, he attempted to repeat the move he made near the start on Schumacher. This time his target was Pastor Maldonado, but unfortunately this time target was meant in the literal sense. Hamilton barged straight into Maldonado, in the sort of move that only really belongs in a touring car race, if it even belongs there.
Post-race petulance
Hamilton’s excuse? It can be paraphrased: “Well, at least I was trying to race.”
I’m not buying that. There was plenty of excellent overtaking going on during the Monaco Grand Prix that didn’t involve punting others off. There were lots of examples of aggressive, but clean racing.
Hamilton managed it himself early on against Schumacher. But there was Schumacher’s move on Rosberg. Barrichello’s on Schumacher. Massa and Maldonado against Rosberg. Clean racing is possible, even at Monaco — no contact required. Check out the excellent highlights video at Axis of Oversteer to see them all.
But Hamilton couldn’t hold his hands up and admit that he had a bad race. He instead chose to question why he had been called to see the stewards at five out of the six races this season so far.
Here is a clue. Don’t cause three crashes in one race. Then you might not get hauled in front of the stewards. As it is, Hamilton is lucky not to have got the black flag for driving dangerously and ending the race of two other drivers.
Instead, Hamilton chose to “joke” that “maybe it’s because I’m black”.
A reminder of why Hamilton is so divisive
It’s too easy to blame the stewards. Worryingly, Hamilton seems to genuinely believe that he should be untouchable — that he can get away with whatever he wants.
Paul di Resta caused an accident, got penalised, and held his hands up after the race. He admitted that he made a rookie error, that he needs to learn from it and improve for next time.
For Lewis Hamilton? As Martin Brundle said in the BBC’s post-race F1 forum, the problem with Hamilton is that it’s always someone else’s fault. He has never been able to accept his mistakes, and he is always the first one to get straight on the radio and whine about non-existant instances of bad driving he has seen from other drivers.
All-in-all, this weekend has been a reminder of what made Lewis Hamilton such a divisive figure when he burst onto the scene in 2007. Back then his cockiness grated, but he was young and arrogant. In that sense, maybe it could be understood.
In more recent years, he seemed to have mellowed. He deserved to win his championship in 2008. Ever since he has done a good job at McLaren, and has managed to keep the lid on his post-race outbursts, even if he is quick to get on the radio to whine during the race.
But Monaco brought it all back to square one.
And it was such a fine start to the race as well. If he’d just left it there, his original, clean move on Schumacher would probably have ended up being my pass of the season. As it is, I have been left angered by the cockiness of a driver that really ought to know better by now.
While it is by no means unheard of for pieces of bodywork to come off an F1 car from time to time, there has already been quite a lot of it this season. In fact, after one and a half race weekends, I can think of four big bodywork failures.
Firstly, there was Kamui Kobayashi’s engine cover detatching itself during practice in Australia. Sauber have since modified the bodywork.
During the Australian Grand Prix, Lewis Hamilton’s floor became loose.
Nick Heidfeld also had a substantial amount of damage to his car’s bodywork, and it’s not clear how it happened. There is apparently no TV footage of it, and to my knowledge there has been no real explanation of what actually happened to cause the damage.
Then this morning the qualifying session for the Malaysian Grand Prix was halted after Sébastien Buemi’s left sidepod flew off his car and settled on the racing line.
There is every chance that this is all a coincidence, but I do find it intriguing that so much bodywork has fallen off the F1 cars this season already, and the second race hasn’t even started yet.
Update: I have been reminded by The F1 Times on Twitter that two onboard cameras have also fallen off this season already. Felipe Massa’s came off in Practice 3 in Australia, while Sebastian Vettel’s detatched in Practice 3 in Malaysia.
One of the most incredible moments of the Australian Grand Prix was when Jenson Button gave up trying to overtake Felipe Massa properly and cut the chicane at turn 12 instead.
It’s easy to see why Button became impatient — he was clearly faster than Massa for several laps, but just couldn’t quite find a way past. The result was a desperate attempt at the high-speed chicane, which wouldn’t normally be regarded as an overtaking spot. Finding that two cars can’t run side-by-side here, Button had no option but to take to the escape road.
Button’s rare error of judgement
What was remarkable was that Button didn’t just give the place back straight away. Button is a mature and intelligent driver, and you would have thought he would know that it was plain for all to see that he gained an unfair advantage by overtaking Massa by cutting a corner.
My initial thought was that, having had to back out and take the escape route, he would immediately give the place back to Massa. I was stunned when he didn’t because, the scale of his unfair advantage was so huge and clear.
Then Ferrari did the smart thing and swapped Alonso and Massa, ensuring that if Button had to let Massa back past, he’d have to let Alonso through too. Smart thinking from Ferrari, and a rare gaffe from Button who can’t have realised that this could be done.
Meanwhile, the stewards investigated Button. Presumably the discussion was more about what the penalty should be than whether he should get a penalty. When Massa pitted, this decision was made for them — it had to be a drive-through penalty.
McLaren show they have failed to learn lessons
What amazes me even more though is McLaren’s naive approach towards the situation too.
After the race, Martin Whitmarsh said that they tried to deal with the situation by seeking advice from Charlie Whiting and Race Control, then waiting and waiting until a penalty arrived. I wouldn’t be surprised if Race Control were like this just to punish McLaren for having the cheek to ask about a situation in which they were so clearly in the wrong.
McLaren have been damaged by this approach before, most notably two years earlier at the same race when Lewis Hamilton got mixed up behind the safety car. Here, too, McLaren sought advice from Charlie Whiting, only to find that it was not forthcoming.
In addition, Martin Whitmarsh claimed that McLaren were not in a position to just tell Jenson Button to move over themselves, as no-one on the McLaren pit wall saw the incident — despite the fact that it was broadcast clearly on the world feed, complete with replays. This simply beggars belief — it cannot be true.
McLaren’s constant mis-steps with the FIA
McLaren are notoriously nervous when it comes to dealing with the FIA. This has particularly been the case since 2007′s famous $100 million fine. As such, McLaren often make the most incredible errors of judgement.
By now they really ought to have shaken this off, or at least come up with some proper procedures as to how to deal with the FIA. McLaren know from experience that asking Race Control for advice doesn’t always work. So why do they still do it?
Is it a simple case of ducking responsibility? Martin Whitmarsh basically blamed Button and the FIA for the whole incident. But McLaren ought to take responsibility for their decisions too. They lose vital points simply as a result of failing to do the right thing.
8 comments