The Official 2016 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix Thread **Spoilers**

The Official 2016 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix Thread **Spoilers**

Author
Discussion

LDN

8,905 posts

202 months

Thursday 1st December 2016
quotequote all
buckshee said:
monamimate said:
Really? I think he (buckshee) was over-dramatic, suggesting that somehow there was some tacit agreement that the driver risks his life in exchange for lord-only-knows what from the team. It's akin to that stupid argument trotted out sometimes for drivers' high pay: "well, they are risking their lives". Every driver, before reaching the pinnacle of F1, was more than happy to drive for nothing as long as they were climbing the ladder; at no time was there any suggestion that "risking their life" was part of the contract...

Many amateurs are willing to take exactly the same risks as professionals in many dangerous sports and often grateful to have the chance to do so at someone else's expense in expensive sports, such as motor racing and horseracing. The fact that a professional driver gets paid does NOT lessen the risk, and payment establishes a contractual relationship between the driver and the employer, where the employer might request that the driver takes a risk greater than the driver, using his own judgment, might otherwise do if he were an unpaid amateur, because the employer wants the driver to take the risk to attempt to achieve a result which is beneficial for the employer (he who pays the piper calls the tune and all that). Although all the drivers on the grid are willing to take part, and would probably drive for nothing, they still take the risk on behalf of their employing team who employ them to achieve results on behalf of their teams. I recall Niki Lauda retired from the Japanese GP in Suzuka in 1976 after a couple of laps because he thought it was unsafe to race in the conditions and this led to the breakdown with his relationship with Ferrari, who were dissatisfied by his decision to withdraw from that race, irrespective of the fact that he was still recovering from his serious burns sustained only 6 weeks before. There's no sympathy or sick notes for drivers in F1; they are obviously expected to die for the cause by their employers.
Quite a nicely presented response there. Of course, all of the drivers risk their life to some degree - but things are a lot safer now and I suppose talk of Hamilton risking his life for Mercedes is bound to ruffle some feathers. I think it fair to say; they employed one of the most racey racers ever - and then asked him to not race, when a WDC was on the table. Bizarre behaviour from Mercedes in my book and Brundle / the grid et all all agree with that. Only a few here, disagree.

LDN

8,905 posts

202 months

Thursday 1st December 2016
quotequote all
Nice video here of Rosberg; what a difference a WDC makes!

Link: https://www.mercedesamgf1.com/en/mercedes-amg-f1/a...

monamimate

838 posts

141 months

Thursday 1st December 2016
quotequote all
buckshee said:
monamimate said:
Really? I think he (buckshee) was over-dramatic, suggesting that somehow there was some tacit agreement that the driver risks his life in exchange for lord-only-knows what from the team. It's akin to that stupid argument trotted out sometimes for drivers' high pay: "well, they are risking their lives". Every driver, before reaching the pinnacle of F1, was more than happy to drive for nothing as long as they were climbing the ladder; at no time was there any suggestion that "risking their life" was part of the contract...

Many amateurs are willing to take exactly the same risks as professionals in many dangerous sports and often grateful to have the chance to do so at someone else's expense in expensive sports, such as motor racing and horseracing. The fact that a professional driver gets paid does NOT lessen the risk, and payment establishes a contractual relationship between the driver and the employer, where the employer might request that the driver takes a risk greater than the driver, using his own judgment, might otherwise do if he were an unpaid amateur, because the employer wants the driver to take the risk to attempt to achieve a result which is beneficial for the employer (he who pays the piper calls the tune and all that). Although all the drivers on the grid are willing to take part, and would probably drive for nothing, they still take the risk on behalf of their employing team who employ them to achieve results on behalf of their teams. I recall Niki Lauda retired from the Japanese GP in Suzuka in 1976 after a couple of laps because he thought it was unsafe to race in the conditions and this led to the breakdown with his relationship with Ferrari, who were dissatisfied by his decision to withdraw from that race, irrespective of the fact that he was still recovering from his serious burns sustained only 6 weeks before. There's no sympathy or sick notes for drivers in F1; they are obviously expected to die for the cause by their employers.
I would consider 2 aspects:

firstly, that the drivers who have reached the top of F1 are so motivated to win that they need little "contractual" (even if only implied) pressure to drive at the limit, so it's churlish to suggest that somehow the team owes them something because they've taken those risks. Put simply: the team has merely provided the driver with the tools he craves anyway.

Secondly, as you point out, the driver should always have the option to decide what is too much, as did Lauda. The fact that Enzo took that so badly was for a great part to do with the type of person Enzo was (not the most pleasant, apparently), but I accept that this a grey area in the owner/driver relationship, but also one which, as we have seen over the years, rarely comes up: the drivers still want to get out there and race (I know there are exceptions).


buckshee

106 posts

244 months

Thursday 1st December 2016
quotequote all
monamimate said:
I would consider 2 aspects:

firstly, that the drivers who have reached the top of F1 are so motivated to win that they need little "contractual" (even if only implied) pressure to drive at the limit, so it's churlish to suggest that somehow the team owes them something because they've taken those risks. Put simply: the team has merely provided the driver with the tools he craves anyway.

Secondly, as you point out, the driver should always have the option to decide what is too much, as did Lauda. The fact that Enzo took that so badly was for a great part to do with the type of person Enzo was (not the most pleasant, apparently), but I accept that this a grey area in the owner/driver relationship, but also one which, as we have seen over the years, rarely comes up: the drivers still want to get out there and race (I know there are exceptions).
The basis of my original posting questions whether a motor manufacturer's agenda of being involved in F1 as a form of advertising in order to flog its cars and vans to the wider public should be a superior agenda to the sport itself and whether the driver, whilst actually on track racing, should be expected to compromise his own results on track in order to achieve a result preferred by the manufacturer. Whichever way I look at Sunday's race it has "race-fixing" written all over it. I wonder if Wolff and Lauda had backed Nico ante-post to win the WDC at longer odds than those offered for Lewis? If it were horseracing the patterns of betting would certainly be analysed.

Hungrymc

6,642 posts

136 months

Thursday 1st December 2016
quotequote all
I'm going to be accused of being a fanboy now....

DrZ. Your comments about nobbling the team in pursuit of your own ends. How do you feel about deliberately driving into your team mate to teach them a lesson? You are well versed in F1 so we don't need to waste time debating the difference between simply not turning in while behind and on the inside line - and taking a line to the outside of the track on corner exit whilst marginally ahead.

It's a serious question, but I presume if you apply the same thought process that you describe for Abu Dhabi, you'd take a massively dim view of this deliberate contact?

For the record, I'm not trying to undermine Nico's title. He has had a very good year and done what he had to do. Well done Nico WDC.

But I can't quite believe the over reaction to Lewis's tactics this weekend. It really seems like double standards to me but apologies if I have miss understood.

heebeegeetee

28,591 posts

247 months

Thursday 1st December 2016
quotequote all
Good old Lewis, this is just like the old days.

After Lewis burst onto the scene every GP thread on this site would be 100 pages long, pretty much all concentrated on him and how he could do no right or wrong, but after a few years people got used to it and these threads dwindled to 20-30 pages at times.

However, at the end of a long season and after an excellent tactical drive (albeit a bit late in the day imo), boom! Back to 100 pages+. smile

Dr Z

3,396 posts

170 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
Hungrymc said:
I'm going to be accused of being a fanboy now....

DrZ. Your comments about nobbling the team in pursuit of your own ends. How do you feel about deliberately driving into your team mate to teach them a lesson? You are well versed in F1 so we don't need to waste time debating the difference between simply not turning in while behind and on the inside line - and taking a line to the outside of the track on corner exit whilst marginally ahead.

It's a serious question, but I presume if you apply the same thought process that you describe for Abu Dhabi, you'd take a massively dim view of this deliberate contact?

For the record, I'm not trying to undermine Nico's title. He has had a very good year and done what he had to do. Well done Nico WDC.

But I can't quite believe the over reaction to Lewis's tactics this weekend. It really seems like double standards to me but apologies if I have miss understood.
I would take a dim view of deliberately driving into your team mate to teach a lesson, yes... I don't recall any incidents this year that Rosberg has had with Hamilton that were premeditated?

RedXYC

31 posts

158 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
Bit late to the party here but he is my 10 cents worth:

Rosberg without doubt deserve the title this year. After a marathon of 21 races, the deserving champ will always emerge. He beat the best driver on the grid not entirely through wheel to wheel combat but using a cunning and sensible approach and doing what he needed to do, a bit like Prost and Lauda, less like Senna. Rosberg has been with Hamilton in terms of battling for wins and championships most of his racing life so it comes as no surprise to me that Rosberg finally beat him.

Lewis's old mechanics are 3:0 to his new mechanics in terms of drivers championships and it will be interesting to see if this can be challenged next season.

For next season, I hope Red Bull and Ferrari can mount a challenge. I recently watched the highlights of the 2010 season and it was truly a classic with 5 drivers and 3 different cars battling for the championship. I recommend everyone should revisit this.

I have been watching the sport since '94 and could be described as a hard core fan. It's great to read all your comments and nominate Dr Z for a Pistonhead reward for his brilliant work this season and adding to the F1 experience!

Hungrymc

6,642 posts

136 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
Dr Z said:
I would take a dim view of deliberately driving into your team mate to teach a lesson, yes... I don't recall any incidents this year that Rosberg has had with Hamilton that were premeditated?
Firstly, apologies for raising this point in response to your post. It is more a general question to the Lynch mob response that he has brought the sport, the team, the human race into disrepute by half heartedly backing Nico up.

And, the constant under tone that he stands out in the sport (which is full of ego - some maybe more talented at playing the PR, some maybe genuinely nicer guys - but you'll find plenty of examples from all that are questionable as this is the pinnacle of a very high value professional sport) as self centered and self obsessed to the point he will do anything to further himself.

We've had a previous admission from last year that contact was deliberate
Austria was pre-meditated. It was building for plenty of time for Nico to work out his defense
Spain was maybe panic and just very ill judged - a dangerous block at best.

It's odd to me that Sunday with Lewis's half hearted backing up (he felt he had to try something and wanted to stop short of forcing a situation where contact was quite likely) causes many to deride him as unsporting and deserving to be sacked by Mercedes. When all these previous incidents were far, far worse but go in mentioned.

For the record. I'm not suggesting Nico should be sacked either. But if one of them needs to clean up their game. It's more Nico than Lewis.

vonuber

17,868 posts

164 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
RedXYC said:
Lewis's old mechanics are 3:0 to his new mechanics in terms of drivers championships and it will be interesting to see if this can be challenged next season.
So it's all down to the mechanics? So whoever gets your wunderkind mechanical will be wdc, Driver irrelevant?

And you are also suggesting there's an A and B team within Mercedes which they have done nothing about?

HustleRussell

24,602 posts

159 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
vonuber said:
RedXYC said:
Lewis's old mechanics are 3:0 to his new mechanics in terms of drivers championships and it will be interesting to see if this can be challenged next season.
So it's all down to the mechanics? So whoever gets your wunderkind mechanical will be wdc, Driver irrelevant?

And you are also suggesting there's an A and B team within Mercedes which they have done nothing about?
In fairness (to the best of our knowledge as spectators), Hamilton won WDCs in 2014 and '15 with Rosberg experiencing at least as many mechanical failures as Hamilton did (possibly more? citation needed). For some reason a number of team members were moved from one side of the garage to the other and visa versa before the 2016 season, in which Hamilton has experienced more mechanical failures than Rosberg. This decision was made public by the team and has been mentioned by Hamilton on a number of occasions while Rosberg has kept quiet on the subject.

It's entirely possible that one team of mechanics is better than the other. We don't know how many team members were swapped, but it's possible that recognising this difference between the two sides of the garage, the team wanted to cross-pollinate it's talent in an effort to equalise them. A cynic might suggest that once it was known that one team was better than the other, Hamilton having won two WDCs, the team decided it was Rosberg's turn with the 'A'-team.

KevinCamaroSS

11,555 posts

279 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
Dr Z said:
I would take a dim view of deliberately driving into your team mate to teach a lesson, yes... I don't recall any incidents this year that Rosberg has had with Hamilton that were premeditated?
That's simple - Austria (and, arguably, Barcelona)

2014 - Spa

Hungrymc

6,642 posts

136 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
HustleRussell said:
In fairness (to the best of our knowledge as spectators), Hamilton won WDCs in 2014 and '15 with Rosberg experiencing at least as many mechanical failures as Hamilton did (possibly more? citation needed). For some reason a number of team members were moved from one side of the garage to the other and visa versa before the 2016 season, in which Hamilton has experienced more mechanical failures than Rosberg. This decision was made public by the team and has been mentioned by Hamilton on a number of occasions while Rosberg has kept quiet on the subject.

It's entirely possible that one team of mechanics is better than the other. We don't know how many team members were swapped, but it's possible that recognising this difference between the two sides of the garage, the team wanted to cross-pollinate it's talent in an effort to equalise them. A cynic might suggest that once it was known that one team was better than the other, Hamilton having won two WDCs, the team decided it was Rosberg's turn with the 'A'-team.
Technically accurate (I think Dr Z shared some data earlier that actually had Lewis marginally worse in 14, Nico worse 15 and of course Lewis in 16). I think it's when you bring the points gap at the end of the year in that you see this year there was a large impact on WDC. It's the only year of these 3 where it would have directly changed the result.... but as said a million times. It is what it is and st happens.

RB Will

9,662 posts

239 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
buckshee said:
It's been clear that despite Hamilton's best efforts he's been thwarted throughout this season by his team. Ross Brawn left MB because he couldn't trust Wolff and Lauda, and it's clear that Hamilton can't and shouldn't either.
Conveniently forgetting the team order for Nico to let Lewis through and on to WIN at Monaco. And hey at least Nico complied with the order. There wouldnt have been anything to argue over at this last race if Nico had done a Lewis then.

heebeegeetee

28,591 posts

247 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
HustleRussell said:
In fairness (to the best of our knowledge as spectators), Hamilton won WDCs in 2014 and '15 with Rosberg experiencing at least as many mechanical failures as Hamilton did (possibly more? citation needed). For some reason a number of team members were moved from one side of the garage to the other and visa versa before the 2016 season, in which Hamilton has experienced more mechanical failures than Rosberg. This decision was made public by the team and has been mentioned by Hamilton on a number of occasions while Rosberg has kept quiet on the subject.

It's entirely possible that one team of mechanics is better than the other. We don't know how many team members were swapped, but it's possible that recognising this difference between the two sides of the garage, the team wanted to cross-pollinate it's talent in an effort to equalise them. A cynic might suggest that once it was known that one team was better than the other, Hamilton having won two WDCs, the team decided it was Rosberg's turn with the 'A'-team.
I don't buy that at all.

KevinCamaroSS

11,555 posts

279 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
RB Will said:
Conveniently forgetting the team order for Nico to let Lewis through and on to WIN at Monaco. And hey at least Nico complied with the order. There wouldnt have been anything to argue over at this last race if Nico had done a Lewis then.
Don't you think that Mercedes would have done a pit stop to enable the pass if Rosberg had not complied? Or perhaps, Hamilton would have overtaken himself given he was so much faster (almost a lap ahead at the end)? My belief is Mercedes did not want the possibility of Rosberg taking out Hamilton when Hamilton went for an overtake.

Dr Z

3,396 posts

170 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
Hungrymc said:
Firstly, apologies for raising this point in response to your post. It is more a general question to the Lynch mob response that he has brought the sport, the team, the human race into disrepute by half heartedly backing Nico up.

And, the constant under tone that he stands out in the sport (which is full of ego - some maybe more talented at playing the PR, some maybe genuinely nicer guys - but you'll find plenty of examples from all that are questionable as this is the pinnacle of a very high value professional sport) as self centered and self obsessed to the point he will do anything to further himself.

We've had a previous admission from last year that contact was deliberate
Austria was pre-meditated. It was building for plenty of time for Nico to work out his defense
Spain was maybe panic and just very ill judged - a dangerous block at best.

It's odd to me that Sunday with Lewis's half hearted backing up (he felt he had to try something and wanted to stop short of forcing a situation where contact was quite likely) causes many to deride him as unsporting and deserving to be sacked by Mercedes. When all these previous incidents were far, far worse but go in mentioned.

For the record. I'm not suggesting Nico should be sacked either. But if one of them needs to clean up their game. It's more Nico than Lewis.
Ok, you're clearly quite passionate about it. I think it comes down to what we find likeable in a sports person. There's no shortage of quick guys in this sport, so I find it a bit funny for some Lewis fans to look down on non-fans for disliking Lewis because darn it, he's so quick on track and he's a [dreaded word]racer and everyone must like a racer who's quick...erm, what about the rest!

Don't get me wrong, Rosberg has had some dodgy moments, but he's been consistent with what he's said out of the car and what he did in the car. I respect that more. Lewis saying in the press pre-race that it's not his style to back up Nico, and then proceed to do it in the race, I find strange.

It's all quite subjective, so I'm hesitant to get drawn into these discussions. Of the racing incidents you cite, I felt Austria was the most dodgy but then he did it against Verstappen once too, so it is hard to argue that it was a pre-meditated move against Lewis. Both drivers are a bit enigmatic for me...it's one of the reasons I find their rivalry/character traits interesting.

WestyCarl

3,217 posts

124 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
Fair play on that decision Nico byebye

https://twitter.com/andrewbensonf1


HustleRussell

24,602 posts

159 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
No way!

Dr Z

3,396 posts

170 months

Friday 2nd December 2016
quotequote all
WestyCarl said:
Fair play on that decision Nico byebye

https://twitter.com/andrewbensonf1
Oh st!