Kovalainen Angry at Mclaren

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/6473980/Heikki-Kovalainen-warns-of-favouritism-towards-Lewis-Hamilton-at-McLaren.html

The Finn is expected to depart McLaren after this weekend's inaugural race in Abu Dhabi, and like his predecessor Fernando Alonso, he will leave angry at the preferential treatment shown to co-driver Hamilton.

"It was always difficult to accept that Lewis was always the first to receive the new parts," Kovalainen was quoted as saying in Finnish newspaper Helsingen Sanomat. "I have never wanted to make a big deal about it, but it would have been nice to just once had the new parts on my car, particularly after we lost the chance of winning the championship."

Kovalainen has 22 points this season compared to Hamilton's 49, but felt that difference would have been much smaller had the team been more even-handed in its alternate strategies.

"Every time this season, when Hamilton and I are in the third part of qualifying, I had to do it with more fuel. If you take into account the quantities of fuel, I would have had pole position several times."

[SGWilko]

Shock horror, a driver blaming his team for his speed relative to his team mate.

Too much to expect something along the lines of;

'I am afraid that, similar to my time at Renault, I was unable to match the speed of my team mate as regularly as I should, given I am one of the best in the pack'

Personally, I blame the Russians.........

[Dave B]

I see his frustration, but I don't recall a single instance where he'd have been on pole once the grid was fuel-corrected.

Honestly though what did he expect, being team mates with a reigning world champion? Naturally if there was only one set of development parts, McLaren would favour Hamilton.

Sorry Heikki, making excuses is part of the game but you're making yourself look foolish with outbursts like these.

[BeansBeansBeans]

It is clear that Hamilton is McLaren's favoured son, but there is a good reason for that.

[Valve Bounce]

It is clear that Hamilton is McLaren's favoured son, but there is a good reason for that.

But I thought Ron Dennis is gone! :confused:

[harsha]

Hamilton's favoured cause he's better

[AndyL]

I wonder if we'll be hearing the same sort of thing from Kimi in a year's time.

[harsha]

If Kimi didn't give a rats *** @ Ferrari...I doubt he'll give a damn now...anyway I think it's going to be in his contract that he's to receive the same treatment

with Lewis and Kimi both having similar driving styles,I don't think it's gonna be much of a problem

[UltimateDanGTR]

IMO, this is 6 of 1 half a dozen of the other.

Yes, Mclaren favour Hamilton. Why? He is world champion and he is just better.

But, Heikki has no excuse as to why Hammy is as-near-as-always faster than him by a large margin. No, he is not expected to be on Lewis's par, there are only 4-5 drivers that are expected to be (or be better), but even so Heikki has not been good enough.

I agree with Heikki about the new parts thing, yes this is true why not use him to test new parts but, Heikki still just isn't good enough. I think Heikki will do well in a mediocre team, punching above his weight, but he is not a big-team-kinda-guy.

[ArrowsFA1]

Sadly all that says is Heikki is on his way out of McLaren.

[veeten]

and today's race put paid to that.

Kimi's in, Heikki's out. End of story.

[Koz]

What reason would there be to give new parts to only one car?

And, if someone can look back through the weight, I too recall most if not all weights being heavier for Kovi - he has done a couple 1 stoppers hasn't he?

[Dave B]

What reason would there be to give new parts to only one car?
If you've only got one set. Remember there's a testing ban, and as such race weekends are often the only opportunity to test development parts. It makes sense to allocate these to the driver who will make the best use of them and offer the most valuable feedback.

[Koz]

If you've only got one set. Remember there's a testing ban, and as such race weekends are often the only opportunity to test development parts. It makes sense to allocate these to the driver who will make the best use of them and offer the most valuable feedback.

Wouldn't it make sense to give parts to the no.2 driver? So the star driver can go out and get wins?
I guess it works both way though.

[Dave B]

Not if you believe that those parts will offer an advantage, no. And why else would you be putting new parts on a car?

[Koz]

Not if you believe that those parts will offer an advantage, no. And why else would you be putting new parts on a car?

If so put them on both cars. It's also about reliability too, isn't it?

[Dave B]

Yes, but if you only have one set...

Are we going round in circles?

Plus you want to be able to perform a true comparison between the "have" and the "have not" car.

[DexDexter]

What reason would there be to give new parts to only one car?

And, if someone can look back through the weight, I too recall most if not all weights being heavier for Kovi - he has done a couple 1 stoppers hasn't he?

The fact is Heikki has been heavier in q3 than Hamilton virtually every time. That's not up for discussion, it's a fact. He's said in Finnish media that he is not allowed to decide his fuel load. Another fact is that Hamilton got new parts before Heikki. I don't understand why Heikki would lie to Finnish media about those things.

Having said that, Heikki should have finished on the podium many times this year, but he has performed miserably. Edit: I think it's fair to say that Heikki is at his best in qualifying and people over here do not understand why he was not allowed to qualify light and start at the front. Starting him heavy virtually never worked.

[Dave B]

The fact is Heikki has been heavier in q3 than Hamilton virtually every time. That's not up for discussion, it's a fact.
I don't disagree, but fuel-corrected has he ever been faster in qualifying? I suspect it's the exception rather than the rule.

[DexDexter]

I don't disagree, but fuel-corrected has he ever been faster in qualifying? I suspect it's the exception rather than the rule.

12-5 for Hamilton was the official qualifying comparison. At Monza Heikki was on pole, fuel-corrected, Valencia as well, although Hamilton might have done another lap, and he has been very close on many other occasions in quali (fuel-corrected) but people hardly ever noticed that since he was heavier and faded in the races. I'm not saying he did a good job but there is a hint of truth in what he is saying. Edit: As I said people here don't understand why they put Heikki heavier race after race when everyone could see it didn't work for him.

[Hondo]

12-5 for Hamilton was the official qualifying comparison. At Monza Heikki was on pole, fuel-corrected, Valencia as well, although Hamilton might have done another lap, and he has been very close on many other occasions in quali (fuel-corrected) but people hardly ever noticed that since he was heavier and faded in the races. I'm not saying he did a good job but there is a hint of truth in what he is saying. Edit: As I said people here don't understand why they put Heikki heavier race after race when everyone could see it didn't work for him.

I honestly don't know what these drivers expect or upon what basis their expectations are formed. You don't have to be real smart to understand that the people that create or buy Formula 1 teams do so with the idea of making a profit and winning the Constructor's Championship. That's their bread and butter. The Driver's Championship is good to have but the team's large money rests on that Constructor's Championship. From my American, capitalistic veiwpoint, I see nothing wrong whatsoever with the teams making decisions they feel will maximize the benefits to the team although it may be to the detriment of one driver or another. It naturally follows that they are going award what they think is their best strategy to the driver they feel will make the most of the advantage. I don't believe you can have both drivers on identical strategies. They can't both come in for fuel and tires at the same time anyway. The drivers need to accept this, or form their own team, or go get job doing something else. Just because your mother and your ego tells you you're the best driver on the grid, doesn't make it true.

All of the what ifs, and mathmatical formulas like fuel adjusted quailifing are ridiculous. Why bother to have the race? Check the cars fuel consumption, how much fuel it can carry and a minimum lap time for every fuel weight. Input the data into a computer program and lat the computer run the race. These "adjustment formulas" cannot account for luck, fate, or the human factor. To say fuel adjusted, the driver would have been on pole like it's fact is silly. Could be, fuel adjusted, he would be starting 9th after screwing up the last corner.

The real solution to this, especially if the FIA wants to cut costs, would be for each team to field one car and driver. The venue sights would have to expand the paddock areas and in some cases might need to have 2 or 3 different paddock areas. It could work.

[BeansBeansBeans]

You don't have to be real smart to understand that the people that create or buy Formula 1 teams do so with the idea of making a profit and winning the Constructor's Championship. That's their bread and butter. The Driver's Championship is good to have but the team's large money rests on that Constructor's Championship.

I respectfully disagree.

The main aim of each team is for one of it's drivers to win the drivers championship.

The WDC is what really matters.

The constructors title is either an added bonus or a consolation prize, depending on whether you win the WDC or not.

[keysersoze]

If he feels he's gotten the short end of the stick, and that it has compromised his performance (and, therefore, has jeopardized his career) I don't blame Heikke one bit for going public. No one on this board is sticking up for him, that's for certain.

[Jag_Warrior]

While the fans follow the WDC most closely, the fat envelopes that get passed out at the end of the season are based on Constructors points (plus whatever backroom, side deals have been made with the FIA ;) ). By chance, McLaren pipped Ferrari by one point to take 3rd. But I'm sure that McLaren would have liked to see Kovalainen pull his weight a lot better than he did, whether he was challenging Hamilton for poles or not.

Heikki strikes me as a nice kid. But as I've said before, I see no reason for McLaren to bring him back next year - he's a weak kitten in a dog fight. When he has had a decent car, he's seldom delivered or been able to take the fight to a strong competitor. If not Kimi, then I'd just as soon see Nico or Timo get that seat.

[Hondo]

I respectfully disagree.

The main aim of each team is for one of it's drivers to win the drivers championship.

The WDC is what really matters.

The constructors title is either an added bonus or a consolation prize, depending on whether you win the WDC or not.

For the team owners and/or investors, Their biggest cash and benefits come from winning the Constructors Championship. Tv money, travelling money, FIA prize money, increased sponsor interest, increased royalties, an increased value of the team if you desire to sell it. If your team dabbles in other commercial technologies it reflects well.

If your driver wins the WDC, I would imagine the team gets some sort of royalty every time the team name is used in conjunction with the driver.

If the teams gained more from having a WDC lying around, every team out there would have a clause in the contract requiring the driver to stay with the team for one additional year after winning the WDC.

[Hondo]

I am not against Heikki either but I don't think he is as good as Hamilton. Having been shown no proof otherwise, I seriously doubt there was anything in the Ferrari contracts that specified a 1 and 2 driver status, but you can't convince me Rubens would have racked up 5 WDCs with Ferrari assuming Shumacher never existed.

[DexDexter]

IMO Heikki's strongest area is clearly qualifying and everybody saw that race after race he struggled with a heavy car at the beginning of the races (Monza a good example) and could not cope. I find it very strange that they didn't allow him to use his greatest strength, being quick on a one lap, and let him qualify at the very front. His results could have been at least somewhat better. Why start the guy heavy when it doesn't work? Why not put him lighter than Hamilton? A cynic would say that the reason they didn't do that was that he might have compromised Hamilton's race in some races. Why should he be quiet about his treatment?

[motetarip]

Just because your mother and your ego tells you you're the best driver on the grid, doesn't make it true

:rotflmao:

The constructor's championship is the main prize for the team, as Fiero said it brings in the $$$

[BeansBeansBeans]

For the team owners and/or investors, Their biggest cash and benefits come from winning the Constructors Championship. Tv money, travelling money, FIA prize money, increased sponsor interest, increased royalties, an increased value of the team if you desire to sell it. If your team dabbles in other commercial technologies it reflects well.

If your driver wins the WDC, I would imagine the team gets some sort of royalty every time the team name is used in conjunction with the driver.

If the teams gained more from having a WDC lying around, every team out there would have a clause in the contract requiring the driver to stay with the team for one additional year after winning the WDC.

Who looked happier in Brazil last year? McLaren, or constructors world champions Ferrari? I seem to recall Ron Dennis crying tears of joy whilst Luca di Montezemolo laid waste to his TV. Believe me, whatever commercial benefits come from the constructors championship, the WDC is the one that they all want.

[Malbec]

Who looked happier in Brazil last year? McLaren, or constructors world champions Ferrari? I seem to recall Ron Dennis crying tears of joy whilst Luca di Montezemolo laid waste to his TV. Believe me, whatever commercial benefits come from the constructors championship, the WDC is the one that they all want.

Those personal reactions belie the fact that WCC positions are more important for the financial wellbeing of the team. Most importantly, earnings from TV revenue are decided solely by the WCC, not the WDC. WDC is more important for the fan and probably has a stronger emotional impact, but WCC position = cold hard cash.

Personally, I don't know what Kovalainen expected.

[DexDexter]

Personally, I don't know what Kovalainen expected.

He probably underestimated Lewis and also thought that they would treat him as well as they've treated all their other Finnish drivers.

[Hondo]

He probably underestimated Lewis and also thought that they would treat him as well as they've treated all their other Finnish drivers.

I don't think he underestimated Hamilton, I think he overestimated himself. If you underestimate Hamilton you say "Wow! That guy is good! I'm gonna have my hands full racing him." If you overestimate yourself you say "Well, If I got the same treatment, I'd be as good if not better than him."

[BDunnell]

This is hardly a shock or anything new, is it — team favours number one driver and allegedly gives him better equipment? It's surely a fact of F1 life that few teams are genuinely evenly-balanced. This year, I think that Red Bull, probably Brawn and, before Massa's crash, Ferrari were examples of just that balance of two evenly-matched drivers. McLaren never was with Kovalainen in the second seat, sadly.

[Dzeidzei]

This is hardly a shock or anything new, is it — team favours number one driver and allegedly gives him better equipment? It's surely a fact of F1 life that few teams are genuinely evenly-balanced. This year, I think that Red Bull, probably Brawn and, before Massa's crash, Ferrari were examples of just that balance of two evenly-matched drivers. McLaren never was with Kovalainen in the second seat, sadly.

Id include only Red Bull on that list. Brawn clearly favoured Jenson at some stages. And you could argue that Ferrari only concentrated on Kimi after Felipes accident. Otherwise Kimis great drives in the 2nd were only him racing the wheels off that crappy Ferrari.

Regarding Heikki: I think Heikki expected too much, he´s not in the same league with Lewis. However, I find it stupid for McLaren to not take any advantage of Heikkis quali pace. He could have been on pole several times and that might have worked both to teams and Lewis´ advantage.

[ArrowsFA1]

I don't think he underestimated Hamilton, I think he overestimated himself.
Possibly, but every driver has to have confidence in himself. If he doesn't no-one else will. Maybe Heikki's confidence has been erroded over time and whether that's due to McLaren "favouring" Hamilton, or Heikki simply not being quick enough is a matter of opinion.

[Valve Bounce]

You can't really blame Heikki for slagging Mclaren off before he leaves IMO.. He's about to be dropped from one of the top teams on the grid and he knows its only backwards from here.

.

A guy working for the Asian Development Bank gave me some wonderful advice during my working years, when as a contract engineer, I had to move on to different projects with different companies: "Always leave on good terms; you never know when you might come back". I never forgot that.

[BeansBeansBeans]

Who can blame him? The guy is looking for a drive for 2010 and needs to put himself in a good light.

"I could've performed much better if I'd been given the opportunity and I intend to prove this in the futre" sounds better than "I'm just not that quick, really. Anyone got a seat going?"

[Mark]

I'm certainly also puzzled why people say that teams are mostly bothered about winning the constructors championship. Sure this is nice to have and does make a difference to their prize money.

But what they *all* want above anything else is to have one of their drivers winning the drivers championship. Even if this means coming nowhere in the constructors.

I mean who remembers who won the constructors in each year? Everyone knows who won the drivers championship

[Hondo]

I'm certainly also puzzled why people say that teams are mostly bothered about winning the constructors championship. Sure this is nice to have and does make a difference to their prize money.

But what they *all* want above anything else is to have one of their drivers winning the drivers championship. Even if this means coming nowhere in the constructors.

I mean who remembers who won the constructors in each year? Everyone knows who won the drivers championship

I'd rather be paid than remembered.

[Valve Bounce]

I'd rather be paid than remembered.

Me too :(

[BeansBeansBeans]

I'd rather be paid than remembered.

You're not an F1 team principal. If you were, you'd want to succeed, and the greatest prize is the World Drivers Championship, without question.

[Hondo]

You're not an F1 team principal. If you were, you'd want to succeed, and the greatest prize is the World Drivers Championship, without question.


What world are you living in? Success for a team is staying solvent. You remain solvent by taking in more money than you spend. You take in more money for the team by winning the Constructor's Championship.

I agree the drivers title is desireable and a good thing to have and while I'm not going to bother to research it, I'd guess that more often than not the WCC also went to the team that won the WDC.

Popularity is one thing, cash flow is another. This forum may be the best motorsport forum on the internet with the world beating down the doors to read the latest from our star posters, but if the funding for the forum goes away, so does the forum regardless of how well regarded the posters may be.

[Mark]

You think the bosses of McLaren, Ferrari, RedBull etc care about that? It's about winning, not surviving.

[harsha]

If Redbull wanted to have profits,Why would they enter into F1 in the first place

[BeansBeansBeans]

What world are you living in?

I agree with Ron Dennis

"The primary goal in grand prix racing is the drivers’ championship, the secondary is the constructors’, and we run the team according to those objectives,” said Dennis. “We don’t balance the two. Of course we try to win the constructors’ trophy, because that determines your material income, but we aren’t about money, we’re about winning. If you are successful you inevitably make money, but the first objective is to win.”

I don't know what world he's living in but I think he speaks from experience.

[jens]

DexDexter has mentioned that Heikki's weakness is racing with a heavy fuel load. Well, does that mean any F1 team would be wise to avoid signing him for 2010, because the fuel-loads then would be at least twice as heavy as HK has ever experienced during 2009?

It's not impossible to achieve a good result on a heavy fuel-load and one-stopping strategy if the driver is capable of pulling it off. Kobayashi from Abu Dhabi is the latest example. And if we are trying to find an example about McLaren, then Hamilton achieved P3 at Interlagos on a one-stopper from the back of the grid.

[DexDexter]

DexDexter has mentioned that Heikki's weakness is racing with a heavy fuel load. Well, does that mean any F1 team would be wise to avoid signing him for 2010, because the fuel-loads then would be at least twice as heavy as HK has ever experienced during 2009?

It's not impossible to achieve a good result on a heavy fuel-load and one-stopping strategy if the driver is capable of pulling it off. Kobayashi from Abu Dhabi is the latest example. And if we are trying to find an example about McLaren, then Hamilton achieved P3 at Interlagos on a one-stopper from the back of the grid.

Racing that particular Mclaren on a heavy fuel load is what I meant. At Renault he raced better than qualified. I'm not saying that it's impossible to get a good result with a heavy fuel load but if one can clearly see that certain driver always struggles with a heavy car, why do it race after race? Obviously Hamilton is a much better driver than Heikki (and we don't need any Hamilton fans to point it out here) but I wish people looked at Heikki's situation beyond the actual results. He is not as bad as he looks.

[AndyL]

I agree with Ron Dennis

"The primary goal in grand prix racing is the drivers’ championship, the secondary is the constructors’, and we run the team according to those objectives,” said Dennis. “We don’t balance the two. Of course we try to win the constructors’ trophy, because that determines your material income, but we aren’t about money, we’re about winning. If you are successful you inevitably make money, but the first objective is to win.”

I don't know what world he's living in but I think he speaks from experience.

Experience of failing to win the WCC for the last 10 years perhaps ;)

Seriously though, the WDC is clearly a bigger goal for everyone involved than the WCC. Sponsors included. Vodafone don't want Martin Whitmarsh on their TV ads, they want Lewis Hamilton. Winning the WDC has a benefit to the bottom line just as the WCC does.

[jens]

Racing that particular Mclaren on a heavy fuel load is what I meant.

But as I pointed out, Hamilton came from the back to 3rd in Brazil in a car that is arguably very hard to race with on a heavy fuel load.

Generally I can understand, what you mean - if McLaren would give Heikki lighter fuel loads, he would be able to unveil his potential better at what he is better at - racing at low fuel load. But then again it's hard to blame McLaren for such fuel strategies, because they are afraid that with light fuel load HK might start holding up LH in races. So they are simply taking avoiding action in this respect.

[truefan72]

the only thing that I sympathise with kovy would be the Q3 fuel situation, I think that his side of the garage should have been able to determine their fuel load and just made sure that they were not schweduled to come in on the same lap. so I do hear him.

But having a slightly heavier fuel load has not proved to be such a disadvantage as one might think in 2009. I've seen Hamilton loose out because of the lighter fuel load, where his competitors ran heavier and had those vital extra laps.

Also with kers, he could have still managed to get a better qualy job and race performance. The simple fact is that when it came to sunday's he was no match to his teammate and sadly was no mathc to the drivers just around him. More often than not he would fall back and spend thwe rest trying to claw back postiions he lost in the first few laps.

Looking at his resluts
He did not make q3 in 11 races, where fuel requirements mean nothing
In the other 6 races where he made Q3 he started 2nd in germany and 4th in Italy, and in both those instances, he finished lower than he started, so I'm not sure that an equal fuel load to Hamilton would have changed his sunday performances.

In his 2 years at Mclaren hie has underperformed. I wish him well and have no doubt he will secure a drive for 2010, but he was simply not good enough to be driving one of the best cars on the grid.

[DexDexter]

the only thing that I sympathise with kovy would be the Q3 fuel situation, I think that his side of the garage should have been able to determine their fuel load and just made sure that they were not schweduled to come in on the same lap. so I do hear him.

But having a slightly heavier fuel load has not proved to be such a disadvantage as one might think in 2009. I've seen Hamilton loose out because of the lighter fuel load, where his competitors ran heavier and had those vital extra laps.

Also with kers, he could have still managed to get a better qualy job and race performance. The simple fact is that when it came to sunday's he was no match to his teammate and sadly was no mathc to the drivers just around him. More often than not he would fall back and spend thwe rest trying to claw back postiions he lost in the first few laps.

Looking at his resluts
He did not make q3 in 11 races, where fuel requirements mean nothing
In the other 6 races where he made Q3 he started 2nd in germany and 4th in Italy, and in both those instances, he finished lower than he started, so I'm not sure that an equal fuel load to Hamilton would have changed his sunday performances.

In his 2 years at Mclaren hie has underperformed. I wish him well and have no doubt he will secure a drive for 2010, but he was simply not good enough to be driving one of the best cars on the grid.

In Monza he struggled mightily with a heavy fuel load and hard tires at the beginning. IMO starting lighter from the actual pole (not fuel-corrected) would have resulted in him being more competitive in the race. It's no use comparing him to Hamilton who could drive the Mclaren light or heavy but Heikki simply couldn't so I feel the team is partly responsible for him looking like a total plonker when in reality, he is a pretty fast racing driver on his day. He does have to look in the mirror very carefully as well, I'm not saying that.


But as I pointed out, Hamilton came from the back to 3rd in Brazil in a car that is arguably very hard to race with on a heavy fuel load.
.

Again, by midseason everyone at the team should've known that if you put Heikki heavy, he will not do that.

[Mark]

I think what they are saying is that Heikki on a heavy fuel load stuggled to beat Hamilton who was on a light fuel load. Now it makes sense from a team point of view to put their drivers on different strategies but I can see his point of view when he feels he's always on the sub-optimal strategy.

[Mark]

PS: the WCC brings in the majority of the money, but the WDC brings in the glory,the sponsorship, and the worldwide interest. The teams relish in the WDC because its the one everyone is interested in talking about. :)

Exactly. Which is why they often have one driver out front going for glory and the other on the 'safe' strategy to pick up a few points.

[DexDexter]

Exactly. Which is why they often have one driver out front going for glory and the other on the 'safe' strategy to pick up a few points.

Makes sense. It's just that the safe strategy didn't work for Heikki at all.

[jas123f1]

.. anyway I think it's going to be in his contract that he's to receive the same treatment ..

Yes I think that's the reason they (Robertson and Kimi) will read the contract very carefully :)