The Official 2018 Mexican GP *** Spoilers***

[Marcia]

Deesee said:

I’ll post the links below

(I have not checked all but should work)

https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/f1/11...

https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/f1/11...

Cheers for that, good piece

[Vaud]

2fast748 said:

Derek Smith said:

Saward was way, way off.

Saward just comes across as such an arrogant tool it's nice to see him proven so wrong!

"Lewis Hamilton does not know much about racing history and so cannot learn from the mistakes of others. Perhaps he thinks that if it fails he will at least have the consolation of earning loads more money and being a bigger star, thanks to his hustling management that will sell his image here, there and everywhere. That might make him an international celebrity on a bigger scale than he is, but it will not make him a racing legend. Perhaps Mercedes will pull it off and then Hamilton will look clever, but I fear that this will be a move similar to James Hunt joining Wolf; Emerson Fittipaldi joining Fittipaldi, Jacques Villeneuve moving to BAR or Niki Lauda's ill-fated move to Brabham. History relates that you do not leave a winning team in F1 unless it is to go to another proven winner…" - Joe Saward, GP+ e-magazine.

Well he was right about the image and earning money. He was pointing out that history showed that it was unlikely to work. Note that he said "He feared". Joe has been consistent in his praise of Hamilton as a driver.

At the time, based on the evidence that the public had, it looked like a big gamble. Let's face it the majority of journalists got it very wrong...

[Derek Smith]

Vaud said:

2fast748 said:

Derek Smith said:

Saward was way, way off.

Saward just comes across as such an arrogant tool it's nice to see him proven so wrong!

"Lewis Hamilton does not know much about racing history and so cannot learn from the mistakes of others. Perhaps he thinks that if it fails he will at least have the consolation of earning loads more money and being a bigger star, thanks to his hustling management that will sell his image here, there and everywhere. That might make him an international celebrity on a bigger scale than he is, but it will not make him a racing legend. Perhaps Mercedes will pull it off and then Hamilton will look clever, but I fear that this will be a move similar to James Hunt joining Wolf; Emerson Fittipaldi joining Fittipaldi, Jacques Villeneuve moving to BAR or Niki Lauda's ill-fated move to Brabham. History relates that you do not leave a winning team in F1 unless it is to go to another proven winner…" - Joe Saward, GP+ e-magazine.

Well he was right about the image and earning money. He was pointing out that history showed that it was unlikely to work. Note that he said "He feared". Joe has been consistent in his praise of Hamilton as a driver.

At the time, based on the evidence that the public had, it looked like a big gamble. Let's face it the majority of journalists got it very wrong...

We're all wrong on occasion but that felt a bit nasty. I am a big McLaren fan - there's another one evidently - and did not appreciate Hamilton leaving. But even I doubted the move was solely for money. Indeed, it seemed to me that he moved for the promise of success and the desire to make himself a racing legend.

As for history, Merc's is examplary, with no caveats. How many doubted that Merc would commit wholeheartedly to winning?

Much as I wanted Hamilton to stay at McL, I could see the reasons for moving.

[G0ldfysh]

Polite M135 driver said:

Clockwork Cupcake said:

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

I remember at the time thinking that it was a massive gamble, and if it paid off he would look prescient and if it did not then he would look like an utter berk. As it turned out, it was the former. That does not in any way alter the fact that it was an enormous risk. What is "obvious" with hindsight was not so at the time.

What was even more of a bonus was his 2013 season. He moved at the end of the 2012 season (if I remember correctly) in anticipation that Mercedes Benz would have a big advantage come the 2014 regulations, and almost got the impression he had written off 2013. But as it turned out, Mercedes-Benz managed to put together rather a good 2013 contender, which was surely icing on the cake.

It could have looked like a massive gamble from the outside but one assumes Hamilton had a fair bit more info about personnel, investment plans, development work, etc etc. Before he committed. So still a gamble, but maybe a smaller one.

The 'Beyond the grid' podcast interview with Nico Rosberg is interesting.
Nico comments that he didn't think Lewis' decision to move to Mercedes was a good one at the time. Nico couldn't see how it would work well for him.

[The Surveyor]

Derek Smith said:

....
As for history, Merc's is examplary, with no caveats.
...

In F1 yes, but there are one or two black marks on their history if you extend to sports car racing!

[p1stonhead]

G0ldfysh said:

Polite M135 driver said:

Clockwork Cupcake said:

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

I remember at the time thinking that it was a massive gamble, and if it paid off he would look prescient and if it did not then he would look like an utter berk. As it turned out, it was the former. That does not in any way alter the fact that it was an enormous risk. What is "obvious" with hindsight was not so at the time.

What was even more of a bonus was his 2013 season. He moved at the end of the 2012 season (if I remember correctly) in anticipation that Mercedes Benz would have a big advantage come the 2014 regulations, and almost got the impression he had written off 2013. But as it turned out, Mercedes-Benz managed to put together rather a good 2013 contender, which was surely icing on the cake.

It could have looked like a massive gamble from the outside but one assumes Hamilton had a fair bit more info about personnel, investment plans, development work, etc etc. Before he committed. So still a gamble, but maybe a smaller one.

The 'Beyond the grid' podcast interview with Nico Rosberg is interesting.
Nico comments that he didn't think Lewis' decision to move to Mercedes was a good one at the time. Nico couldn't see how it would work well for him.

Bold bit - I assume Nico meant himself

[Derek Smith]

The Surveyor said:

Derek Smith said:

....
As for history, Merc's is examplary, with no caveats.
...

In F1 yes, but there are one or two black marks on their history if you extend to sports car racing!

Indeed; point taken. Mind you, they really flew.

The CLK GTR was impressive and sounded wonderful though. There must have been something wrong with my CLK. It wasn't quite so fast and hardly made a noise. I had the feeling they must have modified it a bit.

[Teddy Lop]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

AW111 said:

They don't like the number two driver outshining their current golden boy?

To think that they would deliberately sabotage their own car from a points-winning position, when points in the WCC mean so much money, is utter tinfoil hattery

Placing not points per se, and there's so much space between them and 2nd or 4th they can do what they like and it won't make a jot of difference.

I'm loathe to believe they'd deliberately nobble danny to make max look good, well because if you have to appease one driver that way it's a bit pointless paying them both to race. That said it's far from unprecedented, with honda supplying de-tuned ""optimised"" engines for mansell being one of the more high profile examples.

[Lucas Ayde]

Teddy Lop said:

Placing not points per se, and there's so much space between them and 2nd or 4th they can do what they like and it won't make a jot of difference.

I'm loathe to believe they'd deliberately nobble danny to make max look good, well because if you have to appease one driver that way it's a bit pointless paying them both to race. That said it's far from unprecedented, with honda supplying de-tuned ""optimised"" engines for mansell being one of the more high profile examples.

They certainly wouldn't nobble him as in risking DNFs or significant performance loss but I could see them giving all the small advantages and improvements to Verstappen as he is very much being built up to be the future of their team and indeed a major star for F1 generally (just see the Dutch fanbase following him around European GPs).

But DNFs are most likely down to bad luck (RB really seem to be pushing tolerances to stay competitive) or the way Ricciardo drives the car - Verstappen is known to be somewhat less tough on tyres is he not? Could be that Ricciardo's style is just that bit tougher on the mechanicals too, enough to push the car that last little bit over the edge.

[HustleRussell]

Verstappen been quicker than Ricciardo on the whole this season especially in qualifying so if there was any conspiracy, Ricciardo's Mexico pole runs against the playbook.