Alonso's legacy?

[DanTVR]

I like watching him race. But best driver of his generation? I don't think so, he has glimpses of brilliance but all the games he tries to play off the track which come back to bite him have been numerous.

Looking at his driving style as well. Its a very unique mid to corner exit he seems to take. And as such car set up has to have a weaker front end which most drivers don't get on with. I think this goes a long way to explain why his team mates have been further off his pace than people expect. I believe that is why Ferrari wanted rid of him. As car set up was going the wrong way and as the lead driver he couldn't push the car in the right direction.

[Muzzer79]

Fortitude said:

Fernando Alonso BEAT Michael Schumacher, in the Overall World FIA F1 Driver standings, while Michael was still driving at Ferrari.

This culminated in end of Michael Schumacher’s career at Ferrari.

In doing so, Fernando Alonso became FIA F1 World Champion twice.

SO, for me, personally, the legacy of Fernando Alonso, was the manner in which he ‘retired’ Michael Schumacher from Ferrari.

It’s tenuous, at best, to claim that he ended Schumacher’s career at Ferrari.

Schumacher went because Ferrari had to look to the future, in the form of Kimi Raikkonen at the time, not because Alonso beat him to the title.

[sgtBerbatov]

Muzzer79 said:

Fortitude said:

Fernando Alonso BEAT Michael Schumacher, in the Overall World FIA F1 Driver standings, while Michael was still driving at Ferrari.

This culminated in end of Michael Schumacher’s career at Ferrari.

In doing so, Fernando Alonso became FIA F1 World Champion twice.

SO, for me, personally, the legacy of Fernando Alonso, was the manner in which he ‘retired’ Michael Schumacher from Ferrari.

It’s tenuous, at best, to claim that he ended Schumacher’s career at Ferrari.

Schumacher went because Ferrari had to look to the future, in the form of Kimi Raikkonen at the time, not because Alonso beat him to the title.

Well, according to some theories, it was his refusal to partner up with Raikkonen that forced him to retire. Not Alonso.

[LP670]

Muzzer79 said:

Fortitude said:

Fernando Alonso BEAT Michael Schumacher, in the Overall World FIA F1 Driver standings, while Michael was still driving at Ferrari.

This culminated in end of Michael Schumacher’s career at Ferrari.

In doing so, Fernando Alonso became FIA F1 World Champion twice.

SO, for me, personally, the legacy of Fernando Alonso, was the manner in which he ‘retired’ Michael Schumacher from Ferrari.

It’s tenuous, at best, to claim that he ended Schumacher’s career at Ferrari.

Schumacher went because Ferrari had to look to the future, in the form of Kimi Raikkonen at the time, not because Alonso beat him to the title.

But why did they look at Raikkonen in the first place? Because they felt he could do a better job against Alonso than Schumacher was maybe?

Schumacher did not want to retire in 2006 and only did so because he felt like he was being pushed out of Ferrari by losing his unchallenged No.1 status within the team. FWIW i think Michael would have beat Raikonnen in a straight fight but maybe he didn't want to risk his reputation going into unchartered waters.

[turbomoped]

LP670 said:

Muzzer79 said:

Fortitude said:

Fernando Alonso BEAT Michael Schumacher, in the Overall World FIA F1 Driver standings, while Michael was still driving at Ferrari.

This culminated in end of Michael Schumacher’s career at Ferrari.

In doing so, Fernando Alonso became FIA F1 World Champion twice.

SO, for me, personally, the legacy of Fernando Alonso, was the manner in which he ‘retired’ Michael Schumacher from Ferrari.

It’s tenuous, at best, to claim that he ended Schumacher’s career at Ferrari.

Schumacher went because Ferrari had to look to the future, in the form of Kimi Raikkonen at the time, not because Alonso beat him to the title.

But why did they look at Raikkonen in the first place? Because they felt he could do a better job against Alonso than Schumacher was maybe?

Schumacher did not want to retire in 2006 and only did so because he felt like he was being pushed out of Ferrari by losing his unchallenged No.1 status within the team. FWIW i think Michael would have beat Raikonnen in a straight fight but maybe he didn't want to risk his reputation going into unchartered waters.

Interesting and seems like the situation Vettel finds himself in now although he has no Ferrari titles behind him so its a wonder he has maintained the status for so long.

[TobyTR]

37chevy said:

ash73 said:

His legacy is best driver of his generation imo, and my favourite racer since Hakkinen.

He got beaten by the best driver of his generation ;-)

2007? Equal points finish. How about 2010-2013 when Alonso beat Hamilton each year in an inferior car to the McLaren... Got to laugh at the Alonso haters.

Here's some objective reading that tells it how it is:

Part 1 - McLaren 2007: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46225204

Part 2 - Spygate, Hungary '07 and Ron Dennis fall-out: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46226823

Part 3 - the Ferrari years: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46318167

Part 4 - end at Ferrari and joining McLaren: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46238233

Part 5 - comparisons with Hamilton and what makes Alonso an all-time great: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46237953 - really fascinating.

From this objective analysis, Alonso is a supreme all-round and a 9/10 in every area.

It's false that Alonso wasn't a team player. Every engineer and key team personnel who's worked with him said he was a team player. He left Ferrari because of his fallout with Marco Mattiacci, who then got fired and replaced with Arrivabene. Ferrari personnel didn't have a problem with him - Stefano Domenicali adored Alonso and so did Luca Di Montezemolo.

But considering the Ferraris were getting progressively worse from end of 2012 > 2013 > 2014 can you blame him for finally losing hope they will supply him with a title-challenging car?

It could've easily gone the other way with McLaren-Honda; back in 2015 nobody would've predicted the McLaren implosion that was to come over a year later, Ron Dennis leaving at the end of 2016, followed by the downward spiral.

And who could've predicted Ferrari's turnaround from 2014 to 2015? It's impossible and bad luck.

[37chevy]

TobyTR said:

2007? BLAH BLAH BLAH

As I said, he got beaten by the best driver of his generation.

Interesting that you assume I hate Alonso....far from it, I think he is immensely talented, but also a flawed character who hasn’t fulfilled his potential through bad career choices

Edited by 37chevy on Tuesday 11th December 09:36

[paua]

37chevy said:

As I said, he got beaten by the best driver of his generation.

Interesting that you assume I hate Alonso....far from it, I think he is immensely talented, but also a floored character who hasn’t fulfilled his potential through bad career choices

What does his choice of carpet have to do with anything?

[TobyTR]

37chevy said:

As I said, he got beaten by the best driver of his generation. Who also got beaten by Button, Rosberg in the same car and Alonso in an inferior car. But I still believe he's the best of his generation.

Interesting that you assume I hate Alonso....far from it, I think he is immensely talented, but also a floored character who hasn’t fulfilled his potential through bad career choices

Fixed that for you.

I'd say Alonso has fulfilled his potential in some respects by showing the world over the last 17 years what he's capable of as a racing driver. And he single-handedly secured McLaren 6th in the Constructor's Championship with a car that was for the most part the second-slowest in the field and towards the end, the slowest car.

He's an all-time great.

Edited by TobyTR on Tuesday 11th December 01:21

[37chevy]

TobyTR said:

Fixed that for you.

I'd say Alonso has fulfilled his potential in some respects by showing the world over the last 17 years what he's capable of as a racing driver. And he single-handedly secured McLaren 6th in the Constructor's Championship with a car that was for the most part the second-slowest in the field and towards the end, the slowest car.

He's an all-time great.

Edited by TobyTR on Tuesday 11th December 01:21

Shock horror a multiple world champion gets beaten by a former world champion and a decent driver.

absolutely no doubt Alonso is a great driver, I have never denied that....you invented the part where I hated Alonso, I merely stated that due to career choices he never met his potential...he had the potential to beat schumachers records IF he had been as savvy as Schumacher or Hamilton.

you state he was unlucky with his career choices. making a bad move once is unlucky, making it multiple times isn't. the best drivers ensure they are in the best cars so they can fulfil their potential, Alonso hasn't done that.

[turbomoped]

37chevy said:

TobyTR said:

Fixed that for you.

I'd say Alonso has fulfilled his potential in some respects by showing the world over the last 17 years what he's capable of as a racing driver. And he single-handedly secured McLaren 6th in the Constructor's Championship with a car that was for the most part the second-slowest in the field and towards the end, the slowest car.

He's an all-time great.

Edited by TobyTR on Tuesday 11th December 01:21

Shock horror a multiple world champion gets beaten by a former world champion and a decent driver.

absolutely no doubt Alonso is a great driver, I have never denied that....you invented the part where I hated Alonso, I merely stated that due to career choices he never met his potential...he had the potential to beat schumachers records IF he had been as savvy as Schumacher or Hamilton.

you state he was unlucky with his career choices. making a bad move once is unlucky, making it multiple times isn't. the best drivers ensure they are in the best cars so they can fulfil their potential, Alonso hasn't done that.

This doesnt make that much sense as a lot of title winners were just lucky to be in the right place at the right time and be the slightly better driver in the team.
Thats pretty much any williams.mercedes and red bull title winner.
Vettel is currently repeating the alonso saga at ferrari. He cant just jump into the winning car somewhere else
same as Alonso couldn't.
Best and luck are too different things but as the saying goes its better to be lucky than good.

[anonymous-user]

TobyTR said:

Here's some objective reading that tells it how it is:

Part 1 - McLaren 2007: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46225204

Part 2 - Spygate, Hungary '07 and Ron Dennis fall-out: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46226823

Part 3 - the Ferrari years: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46318167

Part 4 - end at Ferrari and joining McLaren: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46238233

Part 5 - comparisons with Hamilton and what makes Alonso an all-time great: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46237953 - really fascinating.

I presume you don't understand the meaning of the word objective?

Not having a go at Alonso as rather like his racing, but those articles are about as far from objective as it's possible to get!

[37chevy]

turbomoped said:

This doesnt make that much sense as a lot of title winners were just lucky to be in the right place at the right time and be the slightly better driver in the team.
Thats pretty much any williams.mercedes and red bull title winner.
Vettel is currently repeating the alonso saga at ferrari. He cant just jump into the winning car somewhere else
same as Alonso couldn't.
Best and luck are too different things but as the saying goes its better to be lucky than good.

Lucky to be in the right place at the right time? or they see something that they like in another team and move?

Fangio was a master at this, moving to a better car/ team when he wanted to, Schumacher moved to Ferrari and built the team around him, Hamilton has done the same, and yes before anyone says it, a lot of its down to good engineering etc, but all the great drivers have spotted this and made the correct career moves.

[TobyTR]

cb1965 said:

TobyTR said:

Here's some objective reading that tells it how it is:

Part 1 - McLaren 2007: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46225204

Part 2 - Spygate, Hungary '07 and Ron Dennis fall-out: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46226823

Part 3 - the Ferrari years: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46318167

Part 4 - end at Ferrari and joining McLaren: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46238233

Part 5 - comparisons with Hamilton and what makes Alonso an all-time great: https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46237953 - really fascinating.

I presume you don't understand the meaning of the word objective?

Not having a go at Alonso as rather like his racing, but those articles are about as far from objective as it's possible to get!

The writer still tells it how it is better than anyone else on this forum, backed up by quotes from the experts in F1 too. That's about as objective as it gets on the subject I'm afraid.

On the topic of the best drivers find themselves in the best cars, Senna only had the best car for two-three years out of his shortened career, yet he's still regarded by many as the greatest. And it took M.Schumacher and Brawn/Byrne/Todt etc four years of hard graft and lots of $$$$ at Ferrari to become dominant.

[anonymous-user]

TobyTR said:

The writer still tells it how it is better than anyone else on this forum, backed up by quotes from the experts in F1 too. That's about as objective as it gets on the subject I'm afraid.

You are missing the point. I am not disputing how good a driver he is as the experts quoted clarify, but the articles only focus on parts of his career and even then the McLaren story is incomplete and patchy in terms of fact. It's written as a fan, not a subjective journalistic approach. It fails to delve into why such a great talent ended up with only 2 titles and being unemployable!

[oyster]

37chevy said:

LP670 said:

Tbf the 2007 and 2008 McLaren cars were not dominant, they were closely matched with the Ferrari equivalents.

As was this years until vettel imploded.

Either way it’s down to the driver to place himself in a team and make it work. That’s why all the greats are great. Fangio moved teams to be with the best car as have Hamilton and Schumacher. Alonso on the other hand has made horrendous career choices, whether it was falling out with mclaren, leaving Ferrari or rejoining mclaren instead of red bull. That to me is what defines his career....immensely talented? Hard to tell when you’re in the wrong car...

Why are so many PHers so obsessed with this?

Lewis is an awesome talent, one of the finest drivers of all time.

He doesn’t need this continual bhing about whether he had the best car - it doesn’t make any difference.

One thing is clear, you cannot win ANY world championships if you don’t have a very, very good car.

If Hamilton had started his career at Williams and then moved to McLaren in 2013, he would have won zero WDCs. That is what F1 is about - car and driver. Always has and always will.

[TobyTR]

cb1965 said:

You are missing the point. I am not disputing how good a driver he is as the experts quoted clarify, but the articles only focus on parts of his career and even then the McLaren story is incomplete and patchy in terms of fact. It's written as a fan, not a subjective journalistic approach. It fails to delve into why such a great talent ended up with only 2 titles and being unemployable!

Journalism 101 even when writing a feature: present angles and back it up with quotes from sources who work in the industry (Team Principals, Engineers, F1 pundits). That's what the F1 journalist has done.

What specifically are you having trouble with in those articles and in your opinion what is incorrect with them?

As far as I can see, the articles are on-point with their titles and bylines.

[anonymous-user]

TobyTR said:

cb1965 said:

You are missing the point. I am not disputing how good a driver he is as the experts quoted clarify, but the articles only focus on parts of his career and even then the McLaren story is incomplete and patchy in terms of fact. It's written as a fan, not a subjective journalistic approach. It fails to delve into why such a great talent ended up with only 2 titles and being unemployable!

Journalism 101 even when writing a feature: present angles and back it up with quotes from sources who work in the industry (Team Principals, Engineers, F1 pundits). That's what the F1 journalist has done.

What specifically are you having trouble with in those articles and in your opinion what is incorrect with them?

As far as I can see, the articles are on-point with their titles and bylines.

If you are going to discuss the career of a driver and try and assess his position in the list of all time greats you need to include the bad with the good. For instance there is no discussion around Singapore 2008 or his at times frosty relationship with teammates outside of Hamilton. The McLaren part of the story omits certain events etc. The Ferrari section seems to conveniently forget how often he aired his dirty laundry in public and that by the time he left many at Ferrari wanted him gone. He's a brilliant driver, but flawed in his people management skills, Schumacher and Hamilton both handle(d) that side of things infinitely better... and both have a lot more titles than him!

[TobyTR]

cb1965 said:

If you are going to discuss the career of a driver and try and assess his position in the list of all time greats you need to include the bad with the good. For instance there is no discussion around Singapore 2008 or his at times frosty relationship with teammates outside of Hamilton. The McLaren part of the story omits certain events etc. The Ferrari section seems to conveniently forget how often he aired his dirty laundry in public and that by the time he left many at Ferrari wanted him gone. He's a brilliant driver, but flawed in his people management skills, Schumacher and Hamilton both handle(d) that side of things infinitely better... and both have a lot more titles than him!

What certain events does the McLaren chapter omit?

Granted, there isn't a chapter on Singapore 2008, but perhaps that's because Alonso was cleared of involvement and what else is there to say on the matter, without risking a lawsuit for the journalist.

The negatives were included, Part three, dirty laundry: "After the race, an Italian TV interviewer asked him what he wanted for his birthday. He replied: "La macchina degli altri" - meaning someone else's car.

"Di Montezemolo was livid. He arranged for a press release to be put out the following day - Alonso's actual birthday - saying he had phoned his driver to wish him a happy birthday, but also to "tweak his ear" for his "latest comments"."

Di Montezemolo: "Sometimes for me it was necessary to work on him to avoid a situation where some declarations, some ideas, started because he wanted to win, [and] could create problems in the team.

"I disagree when somebody says: 'Alonso is a driver that destroys, no, creates troubles in the team.' No. For sure, the biggest difference between Michael Schumacher and Alonso is that Michael in the best and in the worst moments was always very, very close to the team.

"Fernando is a guy that in comparison with Michael is more concentrated on himself than on the atmosphere of the team. This doesn't mean he is not good for the team. But I was obliged to work a lot with him on his mind, on his attitude. Because for him it was more easy to make criticisms. Not outside, but inside the team sometimes, when it is better to be more close with the team to avoid somebody in the team going: 'Oh, but Alonso is not happy.'

"Fernando was not against the team. Not. But in the worst moments he was more looking at himself, [he had] more doubts: 'What do I have to do? Maybe my race driving is not at the best. Maybe the engine designer…' More conscious of himself than the team."

He was more doubtful regarding the overall competitiveness of the team, but always, always very strong, very pushing, trying to do from himself the maximum even in the difficult conditions."

Massa may have not seen eye-to-eye with Alonso, but in Massa's own words he was a tougher teammate to beat than M.Schumacher, (watch N.Roebuck interview). Jenson Button had no issues with Fernando when they were teamates... So that's just Hamilton and at brief times Massa.

All five chapters are heavily quoted by those high-up in F1; that makes it objective.

Domenicali, Di Montezemolo and Ferrari engineers still speak highly of Alonso. How this year panned out they'd probably rather have him leading the team than Vettel, for instance.

Hamilton's people-management skills are flawed too. He even publically denies to journalists having had PR training, when he most certainly has. Hamilton relies on race engineers to solve problems in races and come up with solutions - "Team, just tell me what I need to do?", and "There have also been noticeable occasions when Hamilton's results were compromised by an apparent need sometimes to lean on the team for decisions a driver of his greatness should have been able to make himself."

But Alonso does that himself.

Andrea Stella, Ferrari race engineer: "Our collaboration over the years was very positive. He was relaxed and open to our ways of working at Ferrari. I think he is much cleverer than me. In the race I'd say "we need to do something" and he would come back with an answer I'd never have thought of. And he could do it while driving."

I wonder if people read the articles posted at times.

[E34-3.2]

TobyTR said:

What certain events does the McLaren chapter omit?

Granted, there isn't a chapter on Singapore 2008, but perhaps that's because Alonso was cleared of involvement and what else is there to say on the matter, without risking a lawsuit for the journalist.

The negatives were included, Part three, dirty laundry: "After the race, an Italian TV interviewer asked him what he wanted for his birthday. He replied: "La macchina degli altri" - meaning someone else's car.

"Di Montezemolo was livid. He arranged for a press release to be put out the following day - Alonso's actual birthday - saying he had phoned his driver to wish him a happy birthday, but also to "tweak his ear" for his "latest comments"."

Di Montezemolo: "Sometimes for me it was necessary to work on him to avoid a situation where some declarations, some ideas, started because he wanted to win, [and] could create problems in the team.

"I disagree when somebody says: 'Alonso is a driver that destroys, no, creates troubles in the team.' No. For sure, the biggest difference between Michael Schumacher and Alonso is that Michael in the best and in the worst moments was always very, very close to the team.

"Fernando is a guy that in comparison with Michael is more concentrated on himself than on the atmosphere of the team. This doesn't mean he is not good for the team. But I was obliged to work a lot with him on his mind, on his attitude. Because for him it was more easy to make criticisms. Not outside, but inside the team sometimes, when it is better to be more close with the team to avoid somebody in the team going: 'Oh, but Alonso is not happy.'

"Fernando was not against the team. Not. But in the worst moments he was more looking at himself, [he had] more doubts: 'What do I have to do? Maybe my race driving is not at the best. Maybe the engine designer…' More conscious of himself than the team."

He was more doubtful regarding the overall competitiveness of the team, but always, always very strong, very pushing, trying to do from himself the maximum even in the difficult conditions."

Massa may have not seen eye-to-eye with Alonso, but in Massa's own words he was a tougher teammate to beat than M.Schumacher, (watch N.Roebuck interview). Jenson Button had no issues with Fernando when they were teamates... So that's just Hamilton and at brief times Massa.

All five chapters are heavily quoted by those high-up in F1; that makes it objective.

Domenicali, Di Montezemolo and Ferrari engineers still speak highly of Alonso. How this year panned out they'd probably rather have him leading the team than Vettel, for instance.

Hamilton's people-management skills are flawed too. He even publically denies to journalists having had PR training, when he most certainly has. Hamilton relies on race engineers to solve problems in races and come up with solutions - "Team, just tell me what I need to do?", and "There have also been noticeable occasions when Hamilton's results were compromised by an apparent need sometimes to lean on the team for decisions a driver of his greatness should have been able to make himself."

But Alonso does that himself.

Andrea Stella, Ferrari race engineer: "Our collaboration over the years was very positive. He was relaxed and open to our ways of working at Ferrari. I think he is much cleverer than me. In the race I'd say "we need to do something" and he would come back with an answer I'd never have thought of. And he could do it while driving."

I wonder if people read the articles posted at times.

Bitter about Hamilton successful F1 carrer?