Where to for Alonso?

Where to for Alonso?

Author
Discussion

KevinCamaroSS

11,623 posts

280 months

Wednesday 29th March 2017
quotequote all
tommunster10 said:
Any links to that quote? Toto seemed to think It could happen.
Why do you think he has a veto on team-mate in his contract?

The Surveyor

7,576 posts

237 months

Thursday 30th March 2017
quotequote all
KevinCamaroSS said:
Why do you think he has a veto on team-mate in his contract?
Because his stock was high enough to ask for one, and to get one. Hamilton has the same and going back so did Schumacher and Prost amongst others. It's nothing new, it just adds a little leverage, some control to reinforce his contract value.

FeelingLucky

1,082 posts

164 months

Friday 31st March 2017
quotequote all
Dermot O'Logical said:
I admire the blind optimism of those who believe that a Mercedes engine will turn McLaren into front-runners, because the last time they had one they were easily the weakest of the Mercedes engined cars, and they seem to have forgotten how to build a decent chassis.
I'm genuinely not sure if you believe what you are shovelling, but....

2014:
Mercedes 701
Red Bull 405
Williams 320
Ferrari 216
McLaren 181
Force India 155

Whilst p1ss poor by any yardstick, they were not even the worst Merc engine team, let alone "easily" the worst.
Still, not one to let the facts get in the way, eh Dermot?

Vaud

50,426 posts

155 months

Friday 31st March 2017
quotequote all
The Surveyor said:
KevinCamaroSS said:
Why do you think he has a veto on team-mate in his contract?
Because his stock was high enough to ask for one, and to get one. Hamilton has the same and going back so did Schumacher and Prost amongst others. It's nothing new, it just adds a little leverage, some control to reinforce his contract value.
I think (I can't remember where I read it) that he doesn't have a veto, but the team agreed to consult him on any team mate.

Dermot O'Logical

2,574 posts

129 months

Friday 31st March 2017
quotequote all
FeelingLucky said:
I'm genuinely not sure if you believe what you are shovelling, but....

2014:
Mercedes 701
Red Bull 405
Williams 320
Ferrari 216
McLaren 181
Force India 155

Whilst p1ss poor by any yardstick, they were not even the worst Merc engine team, let alone "easily" the worst.
Still, not one to let the facts get in the way, eh Dermot?
If you're going to be pedantic, and clearly you are, outscoring a vastly under-resourced team like Force India by something of the magnitude of one point or so per race hardly constitutes a crushing victory, but I understand that McLaren fans need to grasp at any straw like a drowning man.

Given the resources of the respective teams, although it seems that McLaren's inability to use Petronas fuel and lubricants contributed to their lack of competitiveness but they haven't produced a competitive chassis since 2012, and that's half a decade away now.

VolvoT5

4,155 posts

174 months

Friday 31st March 2017
quotequote all
He made some kind noises about Ferrari recently... I wonder if he would possibly consider a return if Vettel shuffles off to Mercedes (but why would he if Ferrari start winning?)

KevinCamaroSS

11,623 posts

280 months

Friday 31st March 2017
quotequote all
Vaud said:
I think (I can't remember where I read it) that he doesn't have a veto, but the team agreed to consult him on any team mate.
No, that is Hamilton.

KevinCamaroSS

11,623 posts

280 months

Friday 31st March 2017
quotequote all
The Surveyor said:
KevinCamaroSS said:
Why do you think he has a veto on team-mate in his contract?
Because his stock was high enough to ask for one, and to get one. Hamilton has the same and going back so did Schumacher and Prost amongst others. It's nothing new, it just adds a little leverage, some control to reinforce his contract value.
It is not me querying it, TM10 is the individual.

Dermot O'Logical

2,574 posts

129 months

Friday 31st March 2017
quotequote all
VolvoT5 said:
He made some kind noises about Ferrari recently... I wonder if he would possibly consider a return if Vettel shuffles off to Mercedes (but why would he if Ferrari start winning?)
You're right to believe that Vettel would probably stay at Ferrari if they can produce a winning car. Vettel seems to want to emulate Michael Schumacher in leading Ferrari back to winning ways.

As far as Alonso and Ferrari are concerned, various sources suggest that Ferrari may not want him back. Although if Vettel were to move to Mercedes Ferrari would want a proven winner to replace him, and Alonso has what may be an irresistible combination of a hunger to win and the racecraft and cunning to make it happen. And Ferrari, along with Mercedes and possibly Red Bull are probably the only teams which could offer Alonso a competitive car and €30m per season.

b0rk

2,302 posts

146 months

Friday 31st March 2017
quotequote all
Dermot O'Logical said:
You're right to believe that Vettel would probably stay at Ferrari if they can produce a winning car. Vettel seems to want to emulate Michael Schumacher in leading Ferrari back to winning ways.
I'd expect any deal around Vettel to Ferrari would likely see Hamilton sitting in a red car. If Vettel and Hamilton sit still I see no opening for Alonso, however if either swaps team I see the other also swapping and no seat for Alonso.

VolvoT5

4,155 posts

174 months

Friday 31st March 2017
quotequote all
BoRED S2upid said:
It's just a gut feeling they have had so many personnel changes there recently and if they want to try and dominate again like Merc have done it's no good having vetel fighting with Hamilton with Kimi 4th or 5th they need 1,2 at every race which takes a great car and 2 great drivers.
I'm not so sure. I think Ferrari are happy having two drivers who both accept their role. If Raikkonen is scoring enough points for the constructors and looks capable of winning when Vettel has a bad day then there is no reason they would want to rock the boat by having Hamilton or Alonso line up against Vettel is there?

They were supposedly grooming Jules Bianchi to replace Raikkonen and I now wonder if they may switch their attentions to another young driver like Giovinazzi.

Alonso's big problem is not his ability but his personality and the baggage he has that makes all the big teams very wary. Even last weekend he could resist having a dig at Vandoorne by stating the only thing good about this weekend was 'being 1 second faster than my team mate'. Who wants a guy in their team who is known for trying to cause friction and play politics?

There is something to be said for just keeping your mouth shut and getting on with the job... probably part of the reason that good but slightly declining drivers such as Raikkonen, Massa and Button got to stick around so long.

Mr_Thyroid

1,995 posts

227 months

Friday 31st March 2017
quotequote all
Dermot O'Logical said:
FeelingLucky said:
I'm genuinely not sure if you believe what you are shovelling, but....

2014:
Mercedes 701
Red Bull 405
Williams 320
Ferrari 216
McLaren 181
Force India 155

Whilst p1ss poor by any yardstick, they were not even the worst Merc engine team, let alone "easily" the worst.
Still, not one to let the facts get in the way, eh Dermot?
If you're going to be pedantic, and clearly you are, outscoring a vastly under-resourced team like Force India by something of the magnitude of one point or so per race hardly constitutes a crushing victory, but I understand that McLaren fans need to grasp at any straw like a drowning man.

Given the resources of the respective teams, although it seems that McLaren's inability to use Petronas fuel and lubricants contributed to their lack of competitiveness but they haven't produced a competitive chassis since 2012, and that's half a decade away now.
Gary Anderson reckoned that McLaren's chassis troubles in 2013-2014 were due to chasing peaky aero performance which works in simulations but not in the more variable world of track running - this would lead to confusion about whether setup changes worked and general muddled thinking about the direction to develop the car. Since hiring Peter Prodromou from Red Bull my understanding is that this problem has largely been solved and the chassis has been good, but maybe not the best (as Alonso said during testing how can you know how good the chassis is when you don't have an engine to push it to its limits).

Alonso's 5th in Hungary 2015 is evidence that the chassis was good - a chassis circuit with the easily worst engine - and again 5ths in Monaco and USA in 2016 with probably the second worst engine (after Torro Rosso's year old Ferrari).

Dermot O'Logical

2,574 posts

129 months

Saturday 1st April 2017
quotequote all
Did you watch the reports of the pre-season tests this year? Martin Brundle was walking around the track and watching the cars at various corners such as Turn 3 which are known to show up weaknesses, and said several times that the McLaren drivers were having to get out of the throttle and couldn't push the car as hard as others, because it was clearly unstable.

I know that McLaren had to use the Toyota wind tunnel for a while as they had the same problem as Ferrari in that the wind tunnel results didn't correlate to those seen on track, and if you're trying to live on the edge, inconsistencies are going to push you over. But, wind tunnel issues notwithstanding, with the resources available, both in the UK and Japan, McLaren Honda have produced a back marker of a car. Again.

McLaren's periods of success have a common denominator, which is that they had access to a generous surfeit of power over their opposition. This enabled them to use far more downforce, as the power of their Honda and Mercedes engines could overcome the additional drag. Formula 1 was simpler then. Current aero, fuel consumption and power unit reliability parameters mean that the days of "grenade" qualifying engines and the ability to throw away four engines over the course of a Grand Prix weekend are long gone, and the playing field has been levelled.

According to Gary Anderson Honda are difficult to deal with due to cultural differences and excessive bureaucracy, and they were late to this particular game. But via McLaren they were able to see how the 2014 Mercedes power unit worked, and how it was packaged. They then turned up with something different, partly due to McLaren's insistence on their "size zero" rear bodywork, designed to maximise airflow to the rear wing and over the diffuser. This year's car was supposed to address the issues, and allow a re-packaging of the power unit along the lines of the Mercedes, albeit three years late.

The difficulty now will be finding an honourable route out of the mire, at a time when McLaren don't have (unless Zak Brown can produce a title-sponsor shaped rabbit from his hat) the resources themselves to buy their power units from elsewhere. Even if they did, they would become a customer team, and an unwillingness to do this is what led them to Honda in the first place.

Sa Calobra

37,116 posts

211 months

Saturday 1st April 2017
quotequote all
I think Alonso will leave and when McLaren recover they'll only be a Williams at best for a long long time.

I think Lewis didn't play a blinder if a career move. I bet it was obvious to insiders the way the business was going even pre Honda.

anonymous-user

54 months

Saturday 1st April 2017
quotequote all
McLaren and Honda (in F1) are f*cked. Where this leaves the famous F1 team, who knows. Very sad, however competition is competition.

rog007

5,759 posts

224 months

Monday 3rd April 2017
quotequote all
Sa Calobra said:
Alonso will retire.
Agreed. He's not needed; too expensive and simply too many other good young (and thus cheap) drivers available.