Has Button broken Hamilton?

Has Button broken Hamilton?

Author
Discussion

Alfanatic

7,657 posts

166 months

Friday 30th March 2012
quotequote all
AreOut said:
MGJohn said:
You Sir are a very fair judge. To your short list of two, my list would also include a third... with initials AS.
.


if you are referring to his crash with Prost, it was "just" his revenge for what Prost did to him before, if Prost was punished for that and Senna took that title, Senna wouldn't have to take the revenge...I would NEVER accuse msc or LH for doing such stuff if those drivers did that to them before...remember how msc was angry when DC has let off the throttle for a bit?! His face was so red of anger. Senna had his own mistakes(you should take into account that cars back then were MUCH harder to control without all electronic nannies and having one hand on the shifter for half of the time) but he never went deliberately into someone (except that "revenge") or parked the car in the Rascasse curve etc. He was not Elio Angelis of F1 but comparing to these two he was the fair player of the century.
Senna brought took dirty play in F1 to a whole new level. Scummy just picked up where he left off.

Prost's crash into Senna in 1989 was provoked by Senna's driving pretty much since the two first met at the Nurburgring. I'm not surprised he did it. You might also want to ask Martin Brundle what he thought about Senna parking his car on Brundle's head, or ask Mansell why he had Senna pinned by the throat to the Lotus garage wall and needed to be pulled off him.

I also think you might well be wrong about Senna deliberately obstructing qualifying to protect his pole time too.

Senna was nasty. Fast, but nasty.

That famous interview with Jackie Stewart keeps getting trotted out as a reminder that Senna was a racer, but Stewart was right. Senna caused lots of crashes, more than anyone else in memory, and quite possibly more than MSC, who seemed more canny at picking his moments, but less canny at hiding the intent.

AreOut

3,644 posts

108 months

Saturday 31st March 2012
quotequote all
heebeegeetee said:
You didn't explain why Hamilton's weaving was dangerous at the time, nor recognised that what he did wasn't illegal at the time.

Petrov was not and could not get alongside Hamilton without first picking up a draft from Hamilton's car. Petrov was not forced to follow Hamilton's every move. You seem to have failed to notice that Petrov was weaving too, and that he did that out of his own free will.


Umh I do not even want to try to explain that. If you don't understand why is weaving in front of another driver very dangerous at those speeds there is hardly any explanation that could help. It's illegal for a good reason, if the defending driver had the right to constantly weave nobody could overtake him, especially in a today F1. Petrov was not forced to follow his moves, but that was the only way for him to catch the draft. The "tiny" difference here is that Petrov was allowed to weave, LH was not.

heebeegeetee said:
The Senna/Prost thing is/was ridiculous. AS brought a new, lower level of ethics into the sport. Right from karting and through the lower formulaes and into F1, Senna was renowned for his dirty driving.

Just once though, a driver gave him a bit back, ie Alain Prost. And so Senna decided he had to have justice and revenge against this driver who'd had the temerity to give him a slap back, and for some very strange reason many people have not forgiven Prost for being possibly the only driver who just the once played Senna at his own game.


Senna went for a gap, there was an empty space and he went for it. Nothing wrong or dirty there. Prost went into his car and later apologised that he "didn't see him". Yeah right. Remind me what was that "revenge" for? I have watched many old races and never seen Senna deliberately crash into Prost or anyone else.

Use Psychology said:
you are completely ignoring the fact that petrov was several car lengths BEHIND LH and therefore there was no risk of them hitting each other...


that doesn't matter at all, LH doesn't have the device in his car to measure the distance, and the rule doesn't mention the distance at all, if he was close enough to catch the draft that means he was close

The Pits said:
Eddie Irvine also dared to unlap himself by overtaking Senna. He got a slap for that too in the pits afterwards!
Senna acted wrong there. He was pissed off for some reason that's sure but still not an excuse.

MGJohn said:
No, I did not have that specifically in mind. It was his attitude throughout most of his career which shaped my opinion of him. Before that final crash, I was concerned a few seconds before that his tyres were not ready for his 11/10ths focus mode which in my opinion, he deployed just once too often.


it was not tyres but steering column that caused the crash, FW was and still is directly responsible for that, if that was a mistake from his engineer he still bears responsibility as he is the one who employed him

Alfanatic said:
You might also want to ask Martin Brundle what he thought about Senna parking his car on Brundle's head, or ask Mansell why he had Senna pinned by the throat to the Lotus garage wall and needed to be pulled off him.

I also think you might well be wrong about Senna deliberately obstructing qualifying to protect his pole time too.


could you elaborate on those 3 cases? I can't remember them and I am curious to know. What I know is that Senna was usually so faster in qualifying that he simply didn't have to obstruct things.

Scuffers

20,887 posts

221 months

Saturday 31st March 2012
quotequote all
AreOut said:
Umh I do not even want to try to explain that. If you don't understand why is weaving in front of another driver very dangerous at those speeds there is hardly any explanation that could help. It's illegal for a good reason, if the defending driver had the right to constantly weave nobody could overtake him, especially in a today F1. Petrov was not forced to follow his moves, but that was the only way for him to catch the draft. The "tiny" difference here is that Petrov was allowed to weave, LH was not.
sorry, but yes, you are going to have to explain this one...

as somebody with a race licence, I am struggling to understand how it's so dangerous and yet is done in just about all forms of racing where a toe can be picked up.

Use Psychology

11,327 posts

139 months

Saturday 31st March 2012
quotequote all
firstly there was no rule (there is now)

secondly, the 'gentlemans agreement' about one-move applied only in the braking zones...

heebeegeetee

26,771 posts

195 months

Saturday 31st March 2012
quotequote all
AreOut said:
heebeegeetee said:
You didn't explain why Hamilton's weaving was dangerous at the time, nor recognised that what he did wasn't illegal at the time.

Petrov was not and could not get alongside Hamilton without first picking up a draft from Hamilton's car. Petrov was not forced to follow Hamilton's every move. You seem to have failed to notice that Petrov was weaving too, and that he did that out of his own free will.


Umh I do not even want to try to explain that. If you don't understand why is weaving in front of another driver very dangerous at those speeds there is hardly any explanation that could help. It's illegal for a good reason, if the defending driver had the right to constantly weave nobody could overtake him, especially in a today F1. Petrov was not forced to follow his moves, but that was the only way for him to catch the draft. The "tiny" difference here is that Petrov was allowed to weave, LH was not.

heebeegeetee said:
The Senna/Prost thing is/was ridiculous. AS brought a new, lower level of ethics into the sport. Right from karting and through the lower formulaes and into F1, Senna was renowned for his dirty driving.

Just once though, a driver gave him a bit back, ie Alain Prost. And so Senna decided he had to have justice and revenge against this driver who'd had the temerity to give him a slap back, and for some very strange reason many people have not forgiven Prost for being possibly the only driver who just the once played Senna at his own game.


Senna went for a gap, there was an empty space and he went for it. Nothing wrong or dirty there. Prost went into his car and later apologised that he "didn't see him". Yeah right. Remind me what was that "revenge" for? I have watched many old races and never seen Senna deliberately crash into Prost or anyone else.

Use Psychology said:
you are completely ignoring the fact that petrov was several car lengths BEHIND LH and therefore there was no risk of them hitting each other...


that doesn't matter at all, LH doesn't have the device in his car to measure the distance, and the rule doesn't mention the distance at all, if he was close enough to catch the draft that means he was close

The Pits said:
Eddie Irvine also dared to unlap himself by overtaking Senna. He got a slap for that too in the pits afterwards!
Senna acted wrong there. He was pissed off for some reason that's sure but still not an excuse.

MGJohn said:
No, I did not have that specifically in mind. It was his attitude throughout most of his career which shaped my opinion of him. Before that final crash, I was concerned a few seconds before that his tyres were not ready for his 11/10ths focus mode which in my opinion, he deployed just once too often.


it was not tyres but steering column that caused the crash, FW was and still is directly responsible for that, if that was a mistake from his engineer he still bears responsibility as he is the one who employed him

Alfanatic said:
You might also want to ask Martin Brundle what he thought about Senna parking his car on Brundle's head, or ask Mansell why he had Senna pinned by the throat to the Lotus garage wall and needed to be pulled off him.

I also think you might well be wrong about Senna deliberately obstructing qualifying to protect his pole time too.


could you elaborate on those 3 cases? I can't remember them and I am curious to know. What I know is that Senna was usually so faster in qualifying that he simply didn't have to obstruct things.
That is one of the most staggering posts I've ever seen in my time on PH.

I'm speechless.





dom180

1,180 posts

211 months

Saturday 31st March 2012
quotequote all
heebeegeetee said:
AreOut said:
heebeegeetee said:
You didn't explain why Hamilton's weaving was dangerous at the time, nor recognised that what he did wasn't illegal at the time.

Petrov was not and could not get alongside Hamilton without first picking up a draft from Hamilton's car. Petrov was not forced to follow Hamilton's every move. You seem to have failed to notice that Petrov was weaving too, and that he did that out of his own free will.


Umh I do not even want to try to explain that. If you don't understand why is weaving in front of another driver very dangerous at those speeds there is hardly any explanation that could help. It's illegal for a good reason, if the defending driver had the right to constantly weave nobody could overtake him, especially in a today F1. Petrov was not forced to follow his moves, but that was the only way for him to catch the draft. The "tiny" difference here is that Petrov was allowed to weave, LH was not.

heebeegeetee said:
The Senna/Prost thing is/was ridiculous. AS brought a new, lower level of ethics into the sport. Right from karting and through the lower formulaes and into F1, Senna was renowned for his dirty driving.

Just once though, a driver gave him a bit back, ie Alain Prost. And so Senna decided he had to have justice and revenge against this driver who'd had the temerity to give him a slap back, and for some very strange reason many people have not forgiven Prost for being possibly the only driver who just the once played Senna at his own game.


Senna went for a gap, there was an empty space and he went for it. Nothing wrong or dirty there. Prost went into his car and later apologised that he "didn't see him". Yeah right. Remind me what was that "revenge" for? I have watched many old races and never seen Senna deliberately crash into Prost or anyone else.

Use Psychology said:
you are completely ignoring the fact that petrov was several car lengths BEHIND LH and therefore there was no risk of them hitting each other...


that doesn't matter at all, LH doesn't have the device in his car to measure the distance, and the rule doesn't mention the distance at all, if he was close enough to catch the draft that means he was close

The Pits said:
Eddie Irvine also dared to unlap himself by overtaking Senna. He got a slap for that too in the pits afterwards!
Senna acted wrong there. He was pissed off for some reason that's sure but still not an excuse.

MGJohn said:
No, I did not have that specifically in mind. It was his attitude throughout most of his career which shaped my opinion of him. Before that final crash, I was concerned a few seconds before that his tyres were not ready for his 11/10ths focus mode which in my opinion, he deployed just once too often.


it was not tyres but steering column that caused the crash, FW was and still is directly responsible for that, if that was a mistake from his engineer he still bears responsibility as he is the one who employed him

Alfanatic said:
You might also want to ask Martin Brundle what he thought about Senna parking his car on Brundle's head, or ask Mansell why he had Senna pinned by the throat to the Lotus garage wall and needed to be pulled off him.

I also think you might well be wrong about Senna deliberately obstructing qualifying to protect his pole time too.


could you elaborate on those 3 cases? I can't remember them and I am curious to know. What I know is that Senna was usually so faster in qualifying that he simply didn't have to obstruct things.
That is one of the most staggering posts I've ever seen in my time on PH.

I'm speechless.
Ironically not comment-less though... wink


Alfanatic

7,657 posts

166 months

Sunday 1st April 2012
quotequote all
AreOut said:
could you elaborate on those 3 cases? I can't remember them and I am curious to know. What I know is that Senna was usually so faster in qualifying that he simply didn't have to obstruct things.
Well, the best reference is the book "Senna vs Prost" by Malcolm Folley. It goes into a lot of detail about the controversial incidents that peppered Senna's career.

I did think the book was a bit biased towards Prost's points of view, others have said it is well balanced, but whatever, it's sure as hell a lot better balanced than that ridiculous movie "Senna".

I'm not so sure about the obstruction in qualifying, I've got a really hazy recollection of that, but I seem to recall it had something to do with stopping Niki Lauda qualifying, so it would have been 1984 (Toleman?) or 1985 in a Lotus.

lord summerisle

8,011 posts

172 months

Sunday 1st April 2012
quotequote all
parking a car on top of Brundle was in a F3 race at Oulton Park.

it was covered in an article written for the Northern Region Mashal's club newsletter last year, which some of brundle's thoughts. I shall dig it out if any one is interested

AreOut

3,644 posts

108 months

Monday 2nd April 2012
quotequote all
I am interested.

MGJohn

10,203 posts

130 months

Friday 6th April 2012
quotequote all
Hamilton on BBC Sport said:
.
"I'll be heading to China looking to win - but it's just as important to pick up some good points if, for whatever reason, a win isn't on the cards."
.
Just maybe ... wink
.

Use Psychology

11,327 posts

139 months

Friday 6th April 2012
quotequote all
MGJohn said:
Just maybe ... wink
.
you'll wet your pants at this interview then smile

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/17629978

Sensei Rob

101 posts

26 months

Wednesday 6th November
quotequote all
This hasn't aged well...

sparta6

1,396 posts

47 months

Thursday 7th November
quotequote all
Sensei Rob said:
This hasn't aged well...
Button is definitely better than Bottas biggrin

ajprice

16,643 posts

143 months

Thursday 7th November
quotequote all
sparta6 said:
Sensei Rob said:
This hasn't aged well...
Button is definitely better than Bottas biggrin
There's a parallel universe somewhere with Button kept on at Mercedes after Brawn GP and Hamilton staying on at McLaren to drive the McLaren Hondas.

PugwasHDJ80

7,048 posts

168 months

Thursday 7th November
quotequote all
lord summerisle said:
parking a car on top of Brundle was in a F3 race at Oulton Park.

it was covered in an article written for the Northern Region Mashal's club newsletter last year, which some of brundle's thoughts. I shall dig it out if any one is interested
I'm still waiting for this.....

jsf

14,402 posts

183 months

Thursday 7th November
quotequote all
PugwasHDJ80 said:
I'm still waiting for this.....
What do you need to know?

Its one of the most well known events in F3 and oulton park history.

pinchmeimdreamin

7,576 posts

165 months

Thursday 7th November
quotequote all
PugwasHDJ80 said:
lord summerisle said:
parking a car on top of Brundle was in a F3 race at Oulton Park.

it was covered in an article written for the Northern Region Mashal's club newsletter last year, which some of brundle's thoughts. I shall dig it out if any one is interested
I'm still waiting for this.....
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/historic-racing/80s-month-watch-senna-tangle-brundle

sparta6

1,396 posts

47 months

Thursday 7th November
quotequote all
ajprice said:
sparta6 said:
Sensei Rob said:
This hasn't aged well...
Button is definitely better than Bottas biggrin
There's a parallel universe somewhere with Button kept on at Mercedes after Brawn GP and Hamilton staying on at McLaren to drive the McLaren Hondas.
biggrin
But that would upset quite a few around here.

On the plus side, at least Button wouldn't be telling us what to eat

Drumroll

1,521 posts

67 months

Thursday 7th November
quotequote all
The incident at Oulton Park.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCBRErl7GbU from about 2.25

Crafty_

11,488 posts

147 months

Thursday 7th November
quotequote all
Small extract of the sky feature on Brundle's F3 car https://youtu.be/zoMapCWORPg