Biggest choke in open wheel

[clydekart]

What's with the love-fest with LH. Bottom line he choked-all he had to do was score a podium ( or lower-5th) in one of the last 2 races and he is Champ. By the end of the season, there is no excuse-he had a top 4 car and plenty of experience. He just didn't have the mental toughness to pull it out.
Remember back in 1999 (CART), Montoya- a rookie, almost blew a points lead by crashing in one of the last few races, however he had enough balls to win the championship in the last race by doing what he had to do and score enough points to win (I think he tied Franchitti in points but had more wins).
LH exposed his weakness to the competition and it may haunt him for a long time.

[Kevincal]

Agreed.

[Tazio]

I still have this snapshot in my mind. During the pre-race pit-walk they got the camera under the umbrella of LH. The expression on LH's face was that of a boy about to go away to camp for the first time, or something like that. His father was under the umbrella also. He had an expression on his face like "No son this is something you will do. When you’re finished you will be glad you listened to me" He proceeded to fall right into Ferrari's trap (getting behind Massa, Kimi moved into position so he didn't really have an out, and FA got up close enough to fight LH into the fist turn. The rest is history. When you take this race and what happened in Shanghai, with what little he needed to do. Really this is not only one of the biggest chokes in open-wheel racing. It is one of the biggest chokes in the history of professional sports. If I didn't want him not to win the championship so badly, I might have really felt sorry for the kid, and gutted myself. I can only imagine what his big time homer's must feel like. He'll have other chances. Let's see how he responds!

[leopard]

He is finally number two, but would felt better if he can still seat down at the corner of coffee together being number two to the teammate.

I feel sorry too, he only does things come to as the task.

[wmcot]

I don't think I would call it "choking." China was probably more of a bad team decision. Brazil was a combination of a rookie mistake (proving LH is human) and a technical problem.

As a Ferrari fan, I am not much of a LH fan, but he should get credit for his accomplishments. It seems that LH was just unlucky to have his mistakes fall at the wrong end of a terrific rookie season.

[osg]

Hmmmm Choke? Maybe not. Extremely poor decision making? Certainly.

[Mark]

Choking no? Red mist? Certainly.

[longisland]

I'm not sure one can be called a choke if he wins 4 gps and rank no. 2 in only 17 races. Inexperience? Definitely, but would you rather watch him cruising just to finish in the top six?

[ArrowsFA1]

He made the mistake of racing Alonso when he didn't need to, but that was understandable. Firstly because he is a racer who races to win, not to collect points. Secondly, I think he felt that Alonso has done much to damage "his" team and he wanted to beat him. Simple as that.

We've seen a unique set of circumstances this year which have combined to create an explosive mix in many ways, but you can be sure that Hamilton will learn from this and come back even stronger in 2008.

[jens]

It indeed looks strange that he was almost perfect all season (okay, except Nürburgring) until the last two races. And the mistakes he made were... strange, unusual... and true, uncharacteristic for him, because he seemed to handle the pressure perfectly before.

If Hamilton had made such mistakes in his first two races, then people would have had a lot more understanding. And if he had had 15 flawless races after that, he would get a lot of praise now.

[tinchote]

I don't really see the point of this thread. Which current or past F1 driver is free from making mistakes and feeling the pressure?

Kimi, who lost a WDC a few seasons ago for not stopping to change a tyre at Nurburgring?

FA, who lost the WDC this year for concentrating on his teammate (Hungary)?

Schumacher, who screwed it in the grid at Suzuka in 98?

Hakkinnen, who we saw crying in the bushes at Monza?

Senna, that crashed when leading lonely at Monaco?

[Daniel]

He made the mistake of racing Alonso when he didn't need to, but that was understandable. Firstly because he is a racer who races to win, not to collect points. Secondly, I think he felt that Alonso has done much to damage "his" team and he wanted to beat him. Simple as that.

We've seen a unique set of circumstances this year which have combined to create an explosive mix in many ways, but you can be sure that Hamilton will learn from this and come back even stronger in 2008.
Only losers don't take points.

I think you need look no further than the Rugby on Saturday to look at what Hamilton should have done. The Springboks just like Hamilton could have gone out all guns blazing and scored a few tries and won with a dominant win but they didn't. They realised it was more risky to try and go out in a flourish so they defended and took the points they were given and won what was a fairly boring game to be honest. Hamilton on the other hand went for it in China with Kimi when it really wasn't a race he needed to get involved in and cooked his tyres. Then of course he went at Alonso this race and lost out in a race that again he didn't need to be involved in. Perhaps Lewis needs to listen to a bit of Kenny Rogers to understand where he lost this one. Halilton wanted to win by 1000 points rather than winning by 1 point like Kimi did and that was his mistake (wanting to the battle rather than concentrating on the war).

[Ranger]

I don't really see the point of this thread. Which current or past F1 driver is free from making mistakes and feeling the pressure?

Kimi, who lost a WDC a few seasons ago for not stopping to change a tyre at Nurburgring?

FA, who lost the WDC this year for concentrating on his teammate (Hungary)?

Schumacher, who screwed it in the grid at Suzuka in 98?

Hakkinnen, who we saw crying in the bushes at Monza?

Senna, that crashed when leading lonely at Monaco?

Point is, I suppose, that Hamilton did it twice - the pitlane gaffe in China and the "gearbox" failure in Brazil (he admitted his hand slipped and pressed a button that initiated the start sequence, which Dennis has denied) in the last two races - the most important two races of the championship.

Two of the drivers listed above didn't lose those world championships (Hakkinen, Senna).
Three of the drivers above weren't ahead in the championship when they made their gaffe's - Kimi lost the title that year by more than 30 points so those 10 points wouldn't have meant much. MS was the underdog going into the '98 finale when he made his error. FA was done harshly IMO.

Hamilton, however, lost 17 points to the eventual title winner over 2 races, both of which included silly errors, on the untimeliest of occasions. I think this loss was perhaps the most unbelievable "snatch-defeat-from-the=jaws-of-victory" moment out of all those.

But he'll learn.

[electron]

can you post a link where he says the button-thing? bacause this is what I always thought and was surprised with the story afterwards!
I have someone who i would like to show the link.

[Ranger]

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/071022220432.shtml

Lewis Hamilton has admitted that his bid for this year's Formula One Championship seemingly came to an end during the last race of the season following a moment of human error.

"My finger slipped on the steering wheel and I accidentally pressed the button used for the starting sequence," Hamilton confided several hours after the event, according to Montreal's French-language daily newspaper La Presse.

That error cut power to his McLaren for an interminable minute, dropping him down to 18th place as the Brazilian Grand Prix entered its eighth lap on the Interlagos circuit.

"The car went into neutral and I had to reinitialize the system, that is, reload the gearbox management program," he explained. The onboard camera recorded images of Hamilton pressing several buttons on his steering wheel while other drivers sped by.
If that wasn't true, I doubt Ron would say this, rather than just deny that Hamilton even said it:
http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/071023114211.shtml

But Dennis is on Tuesday quoted as saying: "There was nothing that Lewis did that had any relevance to the gearbox."

Team boss Dennis speculates that the problem may have been caused by a faulty sensor, but insisted that it was a mechanical rather than human glitch.

"The only reason that we did not win the World Championship was the gearbox problem," Dennis told reporters.

[Daniel]

Fair doo's to Hamilton for admitting the mistake :up:

[ioan]

Two of the drivers listed above didn't lose those world championships (Hakkinen, Senna).

Are you sure about Hakkinen not losing in that year's championship?

Are you sure about Hakkinen not losing in that year's championship?

It was Monza 99 he's referring to, so Mika did win the title.

[Jefe Máximo]

Ioan only started watching F1 in 2001. ;)


As for Hamilton, he didn't "choke" in the true sense of the word, but he did show a slight lack of experience and maybe just slight complacence. 12 point lead to Alonso, 17 to Rakka in the last two races but he still couldn't get the job done.

However, even I have to admit that his presence has just made F1 a lot more interesting for many years to come.

[ioan]

Ioan only started watching F1 in 2001. ;)

Look who's talking! :p :

[wedge]

To an extent I would agree that LH choked.

LH had a bad start, KR blocked him into the Senna S and it gifted Alonso a position and then LH tried to re-take that position into T4.

I think the latter was a rash decision because FA had that inside line covered, but then again LH is true racer and his natural instinct is to race for position. Had he not had that electrical/transmission I think LH would've settled for a points finish.

It's a very fine line. Remember 2003 in Japan when Schumi was happy driving in 5th gear and at one point Sato passed him! The critics said that fire in Schumi's belly was dimming was retirement was imminent and the flipside of the coin was that Schumi was settling for points finish.

And then you have a driver like Nelson Piquet who is somewhat undermined over history because he never he got full recognition he probably deserves because of his conservative style and the way he won WDCs.

Oh, and speaking of Piquet, this whole incident reminds me of the 1991 Canadian GP when Mansell supposedly stuck the car in neutral/gearbox gremlins and Piquet stole the win.

Anyway, all 3 title protagonists made serious errors this year. Alonso made some bad starts and Kimi had fallen asleep in the first half of the season so it means Kimi isn't a worthy champion? :rolleyes:

[Tazio]

It indeed looks strange that he was almost perfect all season (okay, except Nürburgring) until the last two races. And the mistakes he made were... strange, unusual... and true, uncharacteristic for him, because he seemed to handle the pressure perfectly before.

If Hamilton had made such mistakes in his first two races, then people would have had a lot more understanding. And if he had had 15 flawless races after that, he would get a lot of praise now.
This is pretty much the definition of choking. It's not a dirty word. It’s what happens when some one performs poorly in decisive and critical situations. It isn't terminal. In fact quite common in the less experienced! He will have plenty of opportunity to put this label to bed!

[Zico]

Were Hamiltons gearbox problems caused by him accidently pressing the pitlane limiter button?

Wheel layout here.. http://www.mclaren.com/features/technical/interactive_steering_wheel.php

"Here’s the onboard video showing the moment when Lewis Hamilton’s car suddenly slowed during the Brazilian Grand Prix.
It seems the McLaren driver may have caused the problem himself by accidentally hitting the pit lane speed limiter button with his left thumb.
The button is the second from the left on the steering wheel. Watch the video below and judge for yourself… "
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2007/10/23/video-did-hamilton-cause-his-gearbox-problem/

Update: McLaren have explained what happened to Hamilton:

“We can confirm that the temporary gear shifting problem Lewis suffered on lap eight of the Brazilian Grand Prix was due to a default in the gearbox that selected neutral for a period of time. It was not as a result of Lewis pressing an incorrect button on his steering wheel.”

“It was a gearbox problem, and it went into forced-neutral and changing down seemed to rectify it - it might be mechanical, but we doubt it. If it was something mechanical, they usually don’t fix themselves. It could be electronics software - but there’s no evidence in the analysis to support that. Could be a sensor - but again, there’s no evidence in the data recordings.

“So it would appear that the barrels that change gear went out of control - and out of control of the driver - and that’s probably hydraulic.

“That could be either a very small Moog servo control valves that were interfered with by a tiny piece of debris or they are sensitive to magnetic interference - something generated a magnetic field which caused the valve to misbehave.”



Im not 100% convinced by either theories but can see the logic in the 1st suggestion.. but wouldn't you think a misfire would be heard ?? Inconclusive for me, just wondered what you guys thought..

Or... (for the conspiracy theorists) Bernie seemed convinced Kimi would win pre-race.. maybe he knew something. ;) :D

[ioan]

Seems that the team believes that they know better than Hamilton what button he did press on his steering wheel.

LH admitted himself that he made a mistake. Why does Ron feel the need to always give another version than what really happens?!
This man lives in denial of the reality.

[Zico]

Seems that the team believes that they know better than Hamilton what button he did press on his steering wheel.

LH admitted himself that he made a mistake. Why does Ron feel the need to always give another version than what really happens?!
This man lives in denial of the reality.


Fair comment.. I was really looking for a sound technical opinion by deduction than adding 2+2 and getting 5.. We dont know what mistake Hamilton was refering to.. and so cant judge Ron on these grounds imo..

[janneppi]

Seems that the team believes that they know better than Hamilton what button he did press on his steering wheel.

LH admitted himself that he made a mistake. Why does Ron feel the need to always give another version than what really happens?!
This man lives in denial of the reality.
Or perhaps Hamilton is the kind of guy who would take the blame himself rather than say the car was at fault?

If the wheel functions in zico's link are correct, either McLaren have put the pit lane limiter button in the absolute wrong place or it has a safety mechanism that malfunctioned.
You do not put a button that essentially shuts the car down right next to buttons you use many times during a race.

[ioan]

Did the fuel cap cover open?!
If it did than he pushed the speed limiter button, if it didn't open than he pushed something else, like the Start button as he said himself.

[Zico]

Did the fuel cap cover open?!
If it did than he pushed the speed limiter button, if it didn't open than he pushed something else, like the Start button as he said himself.

Sound logic.. Just need to hunt for some external footage now..

[GP-M3]

Or perhaps Hamilton is the kind of guy who drather takes the blame himself rather than say the car was at fault?


Perhaps they should both just tell the truth then....

[BDunnell]

Seems that the team believes that they know better than Hamilton what button he did press on his steering wheel.

LH admitted himself that he made a mistake. Why does Ron feel the need to always give another version than what really happens?!
This man lives in denial of the reality.

And you know better than McLaren as to what the real reason is?

As janneppi says, there are other explanations.

[ioan]

And you know better than McLaren as to what the real reason is?

As janneppi says, there are other explanations.

Like what?

[Zico]

Re- pressing the start button quote.. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63613

"Compounding these rumours was a report in Montreal's newspaper La Presse, which quotes Hamilton directly as saying he indeed pushed the wrong button.

However, a source close to the Hamilton family has described the report as "absolute rubbish", telling autosport.com that Hamilton has not spoken to the Canadian newspaper or said anything as such to anyone."



Who to believe?..

[ClarkFan]

The simple truth was that Hamilton's wheel had an extra button installed for this race only. That button was intended to launch a surface-to-surface missle at Alonso's car. Since the missile button would only be used once, it was placed next to the pit lane limiter button, but Hamilton hit the limiter button instead. After he did that, Alonso was never again in range, so the missle was never fired.


:p

ClarkFan

P.S. After the first round of pit stops, RD was seen adding dry ice to the Williams and BMW fuel rigs - you read it here first.

[race_director]

Were Hamiltons gearbox problems caused by him accidently pressing the pitlane limiter button?

Wheel layout here.. http://www.mclaren.com/features/technical/interactive_steering_wheel.php

"Here’s the onboard video showing the moment when Lewis Hamilton’s car suddenly slowed during the Brazilian Grand Prix.
It seems the McLaren driver may have caused the problem himself by accidentally hitting the pit lane speed limiter button with his left thumb.
The button is the second from the left on the steering wheel. Watch the video below and judge for yourself… "
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2007/10/23/video-did-hamilton-cause-his-gearbox-problem/

Update: McLaren have explained what happened to Hamilton:

“We can confirm that the temporary gear shifting problem Lewis suffered on lap eight of the Brazilian Grand Prix was due to a default in the gearbox that selected neutral for a period of time. It was not as a result of Lewis pressing an incorrect button on his steering wheel.”

“It was a gearbox problem, and it went into forced-neutral and changing down seemed to rectify it - it might be mechanical, but we doubt it. If it was something mechanical, they usually don’t fix themselves. It could be electronics software - but there’s no evidence in the analysis to support that. Could be a sensor - but again, there’s no evidence in the data recordings.

“So it would appear that the barrels that change gear went out of control - and out of control of the driver - and that’s probably hydraulic.

“That could be either a very small Moog servo control valves that were interfered with by a tiny piece of debris or they are sensitive to magnetic interference - something generated a magnetic field which caused the valve to misbehave.”



Im not 100% convinced by either theories but can see the logic in the 1st suggestion.. but wouldn't you think a misfire would be heard ?? Inconclusive for me, just wondered what you guys thought..

Or... (for the conspiracy theorists) Bernie seemed convinced Kimi would win pre-race.. maybe he knew something. ;) :D



is the " CHANGE TO FERRARI STEUP" Bottom back side of the steering wheel?

[Tazio]

Did the fuel cap cover open?!
If it did than he pushed the speed limiter button, if it didn't open than he pushed something else, like the Start button as he said himself.
He hit the limiter button, but the cap cover failed!

[BDunnell]

Like what?

Like the one put forward by McLaren.

[Storm]

err.Mclaren are essentially saying there is no evidence of any glitch/problem :p :

anyways would be fun if it was due to Lewis making a mistake...another coffin in the nail of the superhuman/ice cool Hamilton persona.

But IMO it was a software glitch........but could have been triggered due to riding the curbs a lot ??

[tinchote]

But IMO it was a software glitch........but could have been triggered due to riding the curbs a lot ??

That's unacceptable. There is not enough conspiracy to it ;) :p :

[nigelred5]

I'm not sure that the buttons on Hamilton's wheel are exactly like those in the link. It appears he hit the middle button twice in that sequence. limiter on/ limiter off? Does the limiter engage or does the button have to be held? Was he trying to scroll his menu's or get a drink? If we had the in- car a few seconds earlier it might be easier. I'm not so sure the car wasn't already having issues b4 the frames where he was first seen hitting the button.

[Roamy]

I think Alonso's engineer re-programmed Lewis's ECU

[wmcot]

What's wrong with letting the public know exactly what it was? Does Ron think that if Lewis did hit a button by mistake that would move him down to the level of being human?

[Enchanter]

They were testing next years standard ECU, which was supposed to be installed on car #1 not #2. If you look carefully, Lewis hits CTL-ALT-DEL a couple of times, followed by Shutdown and Restart :)

[ArrowsFA1]

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/071022220432.shtml
Lewis Hamilton has admitted that his bid for this year's Formula One Championship seemingly came to an end during the last race of the season following a moment of human error.

"My finger slipped on the steering wheel and I accidentally pressed the button used for the starting sequence," Hamilton confided several hours after the event, according to Montreal's French-language daily newspaper La Presse.


...a source close to the Hamilton family has described the report as "absolute rubbish", telling autosport.com that Hamilton has not spoken to the Canadian newspaper or said anything as such to anyone.
A McLaren spokesperson also denied the report and said the failure was not down to human error.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63613

[ArrowsFA1]

LH admitted himself that he made a mistake.
No, he didn't.

Why does Ron feel the need to always give another version than what really happens?!
This man lives in denial of the reality.
1) Where has Ron Dennis given any version of the mechanical problems Hamilton suffered in the Brazilian GP? A McLaren spokesperson has said it was not human error, and Martin Whitmarsh has said the team suspect it was hydraulic valve failure.
2) In the absence of comments from Ron Dennis is it unreasonable to assume you are simply taking yet another opportunity to bash him based on your denial of the reality?

[Daniel]

Couldn't have golden boy making mistakes now could we!

[Ranger]

But now I'm more inclined to trust a newspaper I don't know than to trust RD, who has been appalling this year.

[ioan]

No, he didn't.

1) Where has Ron Dennis given any version of the mechanical problems Hamilton suffered in the Brazilian GP? A McLaren spokesperson has said it was not human error, and Martin Whitmarsh has said the team suspect it was hydraulic valve failure.
2) In the absence of comments from Ron Dennis is it unreasonable to assume you are simply taking yet another opportunity to bash him based on your denial of the reality?

Are you going to live in denial like Ron Dennis?

[BDunnell]

They were testing next years standard ECU, which was supposed to be installed on car #1 not #2. If you look carefully, Lewis hits CTL-ALT-DEL a couple of times, followed by Shutdown and Restart :)

:laugh:

Seriously, though, what will it take to get some people to get the idea that everything that certain F1 teams/individuals say is an out-and-out lie? I really am heartily sick of the level of 'discussion' on these topics.

[BDunnell]

Are you going to live in denial like Ron Dennis?

What's your inside information on the subject, then?

[ArrowsFA1]

Are you going to live in denial like Ron Dennis?
ioan, I asked you a specific, and simple, question which was in response to your claim that Ron Dennis gave "another version" and so "lives in denial of the reality".

[Daniel]

ioan, I asked you a specific, and simple, question which was in response to your claim that Ron Dennis gave "another version" and so "lives in denial of the reality".
Well it was reported by a reputable source (f1-live.com) that Lewis said that and Lewis hasn't actually confirmed that he didn't. It's not unreasonable to infer that Ron is wanting golden boy to seem perfect or is living in denial. Especially considering all the lies and mindblowingly ridiculous theories thrown around here.

[BDunnell]

Well it was reported by a reputable source (f1-live.com) that Lewis said that and Lewis hasn't actually confirmed that he didn't. It's not unreasonable to infer that Ron is wanting golden boy to seem perfect or is living in denial. Especially considering all the lies and mindblowingly ridiculous theories thrown around here.

Which include the conspiracy theories from either 'side', such as those who state that there is a conspiracy to help Hamilton and make it appear as if he can do no wrong. I think this is just as absurd as any other notion.

[ArrowsFA1]

Well it was reported by a reputable source (f1-live.com) that Lewis said that and Lewis hasn't actually confirmed that he didn't.
I assume you mean the quote that has Lewis saying he pressed the wrong button? If so that quote came from Montreal's newspaper La Presse, but according to Autosport (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63613):

a source close to the Hamilton family has described the report as "absolute rubbish", telling autosport.com that Hamilton has not spoken to the Canadian newspaper or said anything as such to anyone.
Which all rather detracts me from the faint hope that ioan might back up his claim that Ron Dennis gave "another version" and so "lives in denial of the reality".

On the other hand if some find making Ron Dennis the pantomime villan entertaining then I guess that's an alternative reality :D

[Daniel]

Yes but a source close to Hamilton could be his dog and one woof could mean yes and 2 woofs could mean no ;)

It is extremely plausible for Hamilton to have pushed the wrong button. It happens to the best of us.

Here we have plausibility. But to try and make some ns point that Ferrari has raised a secret army of ferret's to make their way secretly into the cockpits of their rivals and crawl up the drivers leg at the most inopportune time is not plausible.

A lot of the stuff discussed on this forum is pure fantasy and nothing more. What Ioan is suggesting is perfectly plausible.

But now I'm more inclined to trust a newspaper I don't know than to trust RD, who has been appalling this year.

Totally agree.

Yes but a source close to Hamilton could be his dog and one woof could mean yes and 2 woofs could mean no ;)

I always thought that an article with the words "a source close to" was pretty much bollocks.

[BDunnell]

Totally agree.

As I said in another thread, no basis to this mistrust has ever been proven.

[rabf1]

Anyway, it looks to me like he choked. But he still had a great rookie season. Now we wait until next year to see if it was a fluke.

[Garry Walker]

Hamilton CHOCKED and Bigtime. After Japan the title was his, and he failed to take it when he had to do very little for it. Embarrasing loss. So some justice after all.

[wmcot]

Are you going to live in denial like Ron Dennis?

I already do!...err...wait...No I don't! ;)

[wedge]

Good analysis here:

http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?PO_ID=41183

[Hawkmoon]

On the other hand if some find making Ron Dennis the pantomime villan entertaining then I guess that's an alternative reality :D

Is it any different from those who do the same to Jean Todt or Gerhard Berger, or have done to David Richards and even Paul Stoddart in the past?


Good analysis here:

http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?PO_ID=41183

That's a pretty good article.

I like this bit:


The transmission problem has been covered in depth already, with the finger of suspicion having moved on from a software glitch through a dismissed conspiracy of driver error and onto a valve malfunction within the hydraulics caused by an unusual magnetic field.


Are they trying to say that somebody used the Force on Hamilton's gearbox? :eek:

Raikkonen's helmet looks kinda look like a stormtrooper, so that would make Todt Darth Vader and Di Montezemolo the Emporer! As Hamilton passed the pits Dath Todt stretched out his right hand causing the McLaren's hydraulics to malfunction! :vader:

Seriously, the article pretty much points to a combination of the McLaren being hard on it's tyres combined with Hamilton being the same for the lad's failure to win the WDC. I'd say they're pretty spot-on with that conclusion.

[Valve Bounce]

I remember posting more than a month ago that in the Danish TV series The Eagle, one of the mobsters had a device which could stop electronic gear. This was used to stop a police pursuit and help the baddies escape.

Now this is by no means impossible at Brazil as the track had just been resurfaced and who could say that such a device was not installed beneath the racing line and for someone to activate it as Lewis Hamilton's car passed over it? An intense magnetic field operated by electronics is not impossible, and can be triggered remotely by a mobile phone type of triggering device.

Several swarthy Spanish looking types were seen lurking at trackside exactly where the transmission cut out. Their leader looked suspiciously like Elvis.

[Tazio]

Now this is by no means impossible at Brazil as the track had just been resurfaced and who could say that such a device was not installed beneath the racing line and for someone to activate it as Lewis Hamilton's car passed over it? An intense magnetic field operated by electronics is not impossible, and can be triggered remotely by a mobile phone type of triggering device.

Their leader looked suspiciously like Elvis.
On a similar note. The head of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters AFL-CIO has demanded the Interlagos track be torn up, and the two adjacent Lago's dragged as mounting new evidence of foul play suggest that the body of Jimmy Hoffa is buried under track ,or in lake's!

[ArrowsFA1]

Is it any different from those who do the same to Jean Todt or Gerhard Berger, or have done to David Richards and even Paul Stoddart in the past?
No, and much of what has been said about them has been unfounded and simply wrong as well.

[ioan]

It's always easier to dismiss everything and see the life in a rosy light. Reality is however a different thing where nothing is perfect.

[BDunnell]

It's always easier to dismiss everything and see the life in a rosy light. Reality is however a different thing where nothing is perfect.

I prefer to see reality as something in which many things are wrong, but few of them are ever down to outlandish conspiracies. In addition, taking a balanced, as opposed to biased, approach to forming a view on the things that are imperfect is almost always best.

[ArrowsFA1]

A leading Formula One journalist has apologised to McLaren for a quote wrongly attributed to Lewis Hamilton, autosport.com has learned.
Hamilton was quoted by Montreal's newspaper La Presse as admitting he himself caused the gearbox problem, which saw him drop from sixth to 18th at the early stages of the Brazilian Grand Prix on Sunday.
Veteran Formula One journalist Luc Domenjoz' report from the event included a direct quote from Hamilton himself, saying he had pressed the wrong button by mistake on his steering wheel, putting the car into neutral.
The report was immediately quoted by numerous Internet websites and was seen as proof that Hamilton cracked under the pressure of the world championship finale.
However, Domenjoz yesterday admitted that he did not talk to Hamilton and explained that he relied on information he heard in conversation with other journalists, who in turn were quoting what Hamilton had supposedly said to his engineers.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63645

[Bagwan]

So the conspiracy runs to either , the other journalists giving him false info , or the other journalists having been told not , or paid not , to speak .
Hard to figure a reason to give him a red herring , unless he's hated in the corps .
But , if that's the case , we would be likely to hear about who told him .

To quote Hamilton , they would need to have heard the words , or heard an account of them from Hamilton or the engineers .


Since this is rather explosive info , one would have to assume that he really did hear it , as making up a story would be suicidal , in terms of getting driver interviews .

Being that this has been a scandal-ridden year , it is not inconceivable that this info , if the journo wants to get a press pass for next year , might be dropped into the grey area of heresay and just ignored for the sake of the sport .



Not much is what it seems when so much money is involved .
Success can be determined by column inches .

[ArrowsFA1]

Since this is rather explosive info...
We have now been told it was not said as reported so it's not explosive. It's just a story that probably came out of speculation immediately after the race. Credit to the journalist for apologising :up:

Ron Dennis is right:

"The Internet has been the bane of our lives. This is an uncontrolled, unedited, source of information that is fed into the media. Of course, I am not critical at all of the media. It just makes it so hard because everything is so instantaneous. You are just spending too much time trying to correct the inaccuracies that come into the system."
If you do attempt to correct the inaccuracies then you have something to hide, and if you don't then they must be true :crazy:

It's one of the real negatives of this season for me that this kind of stuff is given credence by simple repetition :down:

[Bagwan]

He said he heard it from other journos , who had heard it from Lewis .

So , who were they ?
If it was untrue , then why not give up a name ?

[ArrowsFA1]

He said he heard it from other journos , who had heard it from Lewis
Not quite.

Domenjoz yesterday admitted that he did not talk to Hamilton and explained that he relied on information he heard in conversation with other journalists, who in turn were quoting what Hamilton had supposedly said to his engineers.
If those other journalists had the direct quote from Lewis then why have one of them not reported it? The story would have been a bit of a coup for them after all, and yet no such quote has appeared anywhere other than in Domenjoz's version which we now know is third-hand at best.

This is a result of chinese whispers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_game), nothing more.

[ioan]

This is a result of chinese whispers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_game), nothing more.

Everyone takes it as he/she wishes.
You say it's Chinese whispers, nothing more, good on ya!
I say it's exactly what happened, the kid pushed the wrong button (for whatever reason).

[ArrowsFA1]

Everyone takes it as he/she wishes.
You say it's Chinese whispers, nothing more, good on ya!
I say it's exactly what happened, the kid pushed the wrong button (for whatever reason).
Ok, so back that opinion up with something more than you wishing it to be true.

[BDunnell]

Everyone takes it as he/she wishes.
You say it's Chinese whispers, nothing more, good on ya!
I say it's exactly what happened, the kid pushed the wrong button (for whatever reason).

Evidence for that (apart from a dodgy quote)?

I would have thought you would take a hard line against this journalist, given that, by some definitions (not mine), he lied.

[ioan]

If you are willing to take for good McLaren's explanation that it was a dysfunctional sensor or electro-magnetic valve that brought up a reset of the whole electronic system than be my guest.

I would however question the fact that once the systems were up and going again the same problem never occurred again. I really doubt that there is a self repairable component in the McLaren F1 car.

Ofcourse it's just my opinion, but I base it on some logical thinking rather than on what Ron or someone close to LH (who might very well be Ron btw) says.

[BDunnell]

Ofcourse it's just my opinion, but I base it on some logical thinking rather than on what Ron or someone close to LH (who might very well be Ron btw) says.

Well, no matter what they say, we know you won't believe them so it hardly matters. If Jean Todt says something, though, we all know it's gospel.

[ArrowsFA1]

Ofcourse it's just my opinion, but I base it on some logical thinking rather than on what Ron or someone close to LH (who might very well be Ron btw) says.
Why the obsession with Ron Dennis?

ioan, I asked you a specific, and simple, question which was in response to your claim that Ron Dennis gave "another version" and so "lives in denial of the reality".
I'm yet to see "another version" that you've mentioned from Ron Dennis.

What we do have is this:

A McLaren spokesperson also denied the report and said the failure was not down to human error.
"We can confirm that the temporary gear shifting problem Lewis suffered on lap eight of the Brazilian Grand Prix was due to a default in the gearbox that selected neutral for a period of time," she said.
"It was not as a result of Lewis pressing an incorrect button on his steering wheel."
McLaren F1 CEO Martin Whitmarsh also ruled out driver error and said the likely reason is hydraulic valve failure.
"It was a gearbox problem, and it went into forced-neutral and changing down seemed to rectify it - it might be mechanical, but we doubt it," he told Autosport magazine.
"If it was something mechanical, they usually don't fix themselves. It could be electronics software - but there's no evidence in the analysis to support that. Could be a sensor - but again, there's no evidence in the data recordings.
"So it would appear that the barrels that change gear went out of control - and out of control of the driver - and that's probably hydraulic.
"That could be either a very small Moog servo control valves that were interfered with by a tiny piece of debris or they are sensitive to magnetic interference - something generated a magnetic field which caused the valve to misbehave."
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63613

So Martin Whitmarsh agrees with you that "If it was something mechanical, they usually don't fix themselves". The difference between you and he is that he doesn't claim to know what happened as yet.

Frankly, I don't give two hoots whether Hamilton was at fault or not. He damaged his chances by racing Alonso when he didn't need to and I did wonder if running over the kerb as he did damaged the car in some way which ultimately caused the mechanical problem. I recall electrical systems cutting out when Montoya did something similar with a McLaren a while back.

What I object to is a story appearing, and it being used repeatedly to criticise and bash McLaren/Hamilton, that has no substance. That's what Ron Dennis was talking about (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63645) when he talked about the damage the Internet medium is causing to media coverage, and the impact that has on the team having to respond to this kind of stuff.

[BDunnell]

Oh, and another thing, ioan — ever heard of an 'intermittent fault'? These things do happen, even on modern F1 cars.

[ioan]

I'm yet to see "another version" that you've mentioned from Ron Dennis.


It's at the end of this article:
http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=33292

If it would have been a faulty sensor or another electronic components that has an influence on the cars electronic systems, as RD suggested, it would have been easy to verify it as everything is registered into their computers.
Whitmarsh clearly states that it was no mechanical trouble as those can't repair themselves.
They still say they do not know what it was after so much time.

I believe they do not want the fans to know that Hamilton made a mistake. It all comes from Ron's quest for perfection and for the image of perfection that we should have about his team.

But I honestly find RD's approach wrong. it's the opposite of accepting that you are at fault and that you have to better yourself.

[ioan]

Oh, and another thing, ioan — ever heard of an 'intermittent fault'? These things do happen, even on modern F1 cars.

And this intermittent fault would have been caused by?

[ArrowsFA1]

It's at the end of this article:
http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=33292
Thanks ioan :up: but that's exactly the same as the other comments coming from McLaren that confirm that it was a gearbox fault of some kind.

This really is a non-issue. The only reason it has become one is down to one journalist, and the repetition of his story.

[BDunnell]

And this intermittent fault would have been caused by?

I don't know. Why should I know that?

Surely you must acknowledge that F1 cars do suffer from intermittent faults on occasion, suddenly losing performance then gaining it again. It is an option.

[SparkyKate]

I don't think I would call it "choking." China was probably more of a bad team decision. Brazil was a combination of a rookie mistake (proving LH is human) and a technical problem.

As a Ferrari fan, I am not much of a LH fan, but he should get credit for his accomplishments. It seems that LH was just unlucky to have his mistakes fall at the wrong end of a terrific rookie season.

Im not quite sure how China can just be put down to a bad team decision. The team might have got it wrong in the first place but it was Hamilton who could feel the car and described it as running on ice...any driver worth his driving seat would have ignored the pits and said 'no, somethings not right i'm coming in'. At the end of the day only the driver, despite all the data in the pits, can really know if theres a problem like that and most importantly how bad it is. If he'd done that he would probably have been running. Rookie mistake maybe, but a chink in the armour and certainly not all down to the team.

And can i also add, despite the FIA rulings to the contrary, the driver is a fairly integral part of 'the team' and i dont think they should keep being referred to as something seperate. If it was a team decision that let Hamilton down he has to take part of the blame as he is a member of the team.

[BDunnell]

Im not quite sure how China can just be put down to a bad team decision. The team might have got it wrong in the first place but it was Hamilton who could feel the car and described it as running on ice...any driver worth his driving seat would have ignored the pits and said 'no, somethings not right i'm coming in'. At the end of the day only the driver, despite all the data in the pits, can really know if theres a problem like that and most importantly how bad it is. If he'd done that he would probably have been running. Rookie mistake maybe, but a chink in the armour and certainly not all down to the team.

While watching that GP, didn't you think that the call that had to be made was incredibly difficult given the changing conditions — as Red Bull proved by losing loads of places by being what seemed extremely cautious?

Still, there's little point debating it again.



And can i also add, despite the FIA rulings to the contrary, the driver is a fairly integral part of 'the team' and i dont think they should keep being referred to as something seperate. If it was a team decision that let Hamilton down he has to take part of the blame as he is a member of the team.

I think there are limits to collective responsibility for anything.

[Bagwan]

Not quite.

If those other journalists had the direct quote from Lewis then why have one of them not reported it? The story would have been a bit of a coup for them after all, and yet no such quote has appeared anywhere other than in Domenjoz's version which we now know is third-hand at best.

This is a result of chinese whispers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_game), nothing more.

That would be second hand , not third .
He heard other journos discussing what Hamilton supposedly said .
He stuck with his story , but couched it with the fact that he hadn't heard the quote himself .
Remember , Bernie wanted Hamilton to win . Easy enough to make one or 2 phone calls or e-mails to make clear that it was not good to make a further fool of Lewis . Easy enough if you've got F1 press passes dangling in front of you .

Of course , it may though , have been as simple as Hamilton having said "I hope I didn't hit the wrong button ." and a slight misquote .



By that time he had already made his race-deciding mistake , and was clearly rattled .
It would be easily understandable in such conditions , but was nonetheless a foolish error if it was an error . That description , as Ioan suggests , could easily be eliciting damage control from Ron .

It's all as plausable as Ron's story , which has no answer at all yet , and may never by the sounds of it .

[Tazio]

Hamilton CHOCKED and Bigtime. After Japan the title was his, and he failed to take it when he had to do very little for it. Embarrasing loss. So some justice after all.Garry thank you for getting back on topic.
In sports vernacular Lewis Hamilton "choked"
Does that make him a "choker"?
For the answer to that we will have to see. So far
One season-----One monumental choke!

[ioan]

I don't know. Why should I know that?

You have an idea however?
After all you won't tell me that you argue based on no knowledge against a point that I back with logics. :rolleyes:


Surely you must acknowledge that F1 cars do suffer from intermittent faults on occasion, suddenly losing performance then gaining it again. It is an option.

Sorry but I don't really think so.
There were often electronic hick-ups on F1 cars in the past, but they either abandoned as a result or they limped back to the boxes at slow pace and their the engineers repaired it. Never did a car repair itself until now.

[BDunnell]

You have an idea however?
After all you won't tell me that you argue based on no knowledge against a point that I back with logics. :rolleyes:

Sorry but I don't really think so.
There were often electronic hick-ups on F1 cars in the past, but they either abandoned as a result or they limped back to the boxes at slow pace and their the engineers repaired it. Never did a car repair itself until now.

ioan, I was only raising it as a possibility. I didn't say there was any evidence for it, or even that I think it happened like that. I am merely trying to show you that there are always alternative explanations. Things don't always happen in a way that suits your line of thinking, and your personal likes and dislikes.

[Crypt]

Anthony Hamilton strikes me as one of those Dads who compensate for their own failures by living vicariously through their offspring. Kinda like those sloth beer guzzling lousy-excuse for fathers who yell constantly at the umpire or coach at little league games.

You can see it in Lewi's eyes, he's going to run down the paddock one day with a chainsaw trying to sever the hands of the other drivers. Scary.

[BDunnell]

Anthony Hamilton strikes me as one of those Dads who compensate for their own failures by living vicariously through their offspring. Kinda like those sloth beer guzzling lousy-excuse for fathers who yell constantly at the umpire or coach at little league games.

Is there any evidence for him having 'failed'? Not that I have seen. As sporting fathers go, he seems to conduct himself very well. There is nothing to compare Anthony Hamilton to, for instance, the fathers of certain tennis players.

[Crypt]

Is there any evidence for him having 'failed'? Not that I have seen. As sporting fathers go, he seems to conduct himself very well. There is nothing to compare Anthony Hamilton to, for instance, the fathers of certain tennis players.


Hah no, I just making a funny. I did say that "he strikes me as". I'm sure he's probably a good father and supports his son just like all the other fathers, grandmothers etc... who come to the races. ;)

It's Friday, I'm feeling a bit loopy.

[BDunnell]

Hah no, I just making a funny. I did say that "he strikes me as". I'm sure he's probably a good father and supports his son just like all the other fathers, grandmothers etc... who come to the races. ;)

It's Friday, I'm feeling a bit loopy.

Forgive me — it's Friday. Sense of humour failure. It's easy to have them with regard to the F1 forum!

No hard feelings, I hope.

[Crypt]

Forgive me — it's Friday. Sense of humour failure. It's easy to have them with regard to the F1 forum!

No hard feelings, I hope.


Not at all my good sir.

[SparkyKate]

While watching that GP, didn't you think that the call that had to be made was incredibly difficult given the changing conditions — as Red Bull proved by losing loads of places by being what seemed extremely cautious?

Still, there's little point debating it again.



I think there are limits to collective responsibility for anything.

No i didnt think that. I think that if you're a racing driver losing so much time because you can feel that your tyres are absolutely knackered you should take responsiblity for your own race and come in. It would have been a tough decision if his tyres had still had some wear in them, as they defiantely didnt, it was a no brainer and driver and team have to take equal responsibility. The team couldnt see his tyres, and altho he claims he couldnt either, he sure as hell could feel them.

As for limits to collective responsibility, yes there are, but apparently in this case 'the team' didnt know the extent of the tyre problem but the driver did. Therefore it is his fault and as Ron keeps insisting Hamilton is infalable, it is the collective 'team' that were to blame. If the gearbox fails, its the fault of those in charge of the gearbox, or those that made it, or tested it. This is true for every part of the car, granted. But as the tyres are from an outside company and only the performance of the tyres with the cars technology can be controlled by the team, it is up to the driver to take responsibility of his tyres when he is on the track. He didnt. Therefore as it was the teams fault that they were too busy calculating to actually realise they now had no choice, and Hamilton was too stupid to tell them, it was a collective f*** up.

[TL]

No i didnt think that. I think that if you're a racing driver losing so much time because you can feel that your tyres are absolutely knackered you should take responsiblity for your own race and come in. It would have been a tough decision if his tyres had still had some wear in them, as they defiantely didnt, it was a no brainer and driver and team have to take equal responsibility. The team couldnt see his tyres, and altho he claims he couldnt either, he sure as hell could feel them.

As for limits to collective responsibility, yes there are, but apparently in this case 'the team' didnt know the extent of the tyre problem but the driver did. Therefore it is his fault and as Ron keeps insisting Hamilton is infalable, it is the collective 'team' that were to blame. If the gearbox fails, its the fault of those in charge of the gearbox, or those that made it, or tested it. This is true for every part of the car, granted. But as the tyres are from an outside company and only the performance of the tyres with the cars technology can be controlled by the team, it is up to the driver to take responsibility of his tyres when he is on the track. He didnt. Therefore as it was the teams fault that they were too busy calculating to actually realise they now had no choice, and Hamilton was too stupid to tell them, it was a collective f*** up.

what with Ferrari in Japan ? Now suppose they got that mail to late..I think both Kimi and Felipe have enough experience to tell them team to go for the fully wets..just like all the other teams did..But nop they didn't..they went for the teams decision..are they both to stupid 2 like you just said about Lewis ?

[Malbec]

Sorry but I don't really think so.
There were often electronic hick-ups on F1 cars in the past, but they either abandoned as a result or they limped back to the boxes at slow pace and their the engineers repaired it. Never did a car repair itself until now.

If you've been following the technical side of F1 then you'd know that there are often backup software systems, redundancies and reboots available to kickstart recalcitrant bits of hardware. The idea of Hamilton having a transient problem with his gearbox is entirely plausible provided there wasn't a catastrophic failure of his hardware, and we can see from the performance of his car in the rest of the race that that wasn't the case.

[Bobby_Hamlin]

Is Lewis Hamilton the new Peyton Manning?!

Oh and whoever held up Montoya as an example of not 'choking' (what a crap term, was it coined in the US? might explain it) - yeah nice example pal. What you neglected to mention was that he only managed to 'get enough points' to win the CART championship because Franchitti's pit crew botched two pit stops and lost him a lap in the final race.

McLaren failed to manage the situation well enough in China, but let's face it, Hamilton was a rookie and even the most experienced of drivers can have trouble with the transition from wet to dry on inters, or have we forgotten about one M Schumacher at the Hungarian grand prix last year? I guess he must have 'choked' too.

[Tazio]

Is Lewis Hamilton the new Peyton Manning?!

Oh and whoever held up Montoya as an example of not 'choking' (what a crap term, was it coined in the US? might explain it) - yeah nice example pal. What you neglected to mention was that he only managed to 'get enough points' to win the CART championship because Franchitti's pit crew botched two pit stops and lost him a lap in the final race.

McLaren failed to manage the situation well enough in China, but let's face it, Hamilton was a rookie and even the most experienced of drivers can have trouble with the transition from wet to dry on inters, or have we forgotten about one M Schumacher at the Hungarian grand prix last year? I guess he must have 'choked' too.
I believe this is an English Dictionary as opposed to an American English Dictionary!
Read it and weep may man!
Read it and weep!

Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary
choke (FAIL) Show phonetics
verb [I] (ALSO choke it) INFORMAL
(usually in sports) to fail to do something at a time when it is urgent, usually because you suddenly lose confidence:
He could score points at will during the qualifying matches, but in the final he completely choked.

[Bobby_Hamlin]

I believe this is an English Dictionary as opposed to an American English Dictionary!
Read it and weep may man!
Read it and weep!

Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary
choke (FAIL) Show phonetics
verb [i] (ALSO choke it) INFORMAL
(usually in sports) to fail to do something at a time when it is urgent, usually because you suddenly lose confidence:
He could score points at will during the qualifying matches, but in the final he completely choked.

At the risk of getting involved in some petty argument over a triviality - and we wouldn't want that on this forum, right? ;) I'm not convinced that 'sports' should be in there, as I have always found that to be an American term. Whether or not choke in this sense has found its way into an English English dictionary doesn't really have anything to do with coining it, which is what I was wondering.

[SparkyKate]

what with Ferrari in Japan ? Now suppose they got that mail to late..I think both Kimi and Felipe have enough experience to tell them team to go for the fully wets..just like all the other teams did..But nop they didn't..they went for the teams decision..are they both to stupid 2 like you just said about Lewis ?

Well that of course would be a fair comment if it wasn't for the fact that Ferrari were doing exactly the same as McLaren were in China except their drivers as soon as it became clear this was dangerous actually pitted for better tyres did they not? You don't know how each individual car is going to behave on its tyres until you are in racing conditions, Ferrari thought the weather was going to get better but it didnt so when this became obvious and Kimi and Felipe reported undrivable conditions, they came in and changed their tyres. Just like Hamilton should have done, 5 laps earlier when he started driving on ice. I stand by my comment that he was being a stupid.

[Tazio]

At the risk of getting involved in some petty argument over a triviality - and we wouldn't want that on this forum, right? ;) I'm not convinced that 'sports' should be in there, as I have always found that to be an American term. Whether or not choke in this sense has found its way into an English English dictionary doesn't really have anything to do with coining it, which is what I was wondering.
I suggest you research until your heart is content.
I don't care if the term was coined in Uranus.
It translates quite intelligibly into English.
Said definition applies to Lewis Hamilton’s quest for
The Formula One 2007 World Drivers Championship

[ioan]

If you've been following the technical side of F1 then you'd know that there are often backup software systems, redundancies and reboots available to kickstart recalcitrant bits of hardware.

Are you kidding?
If, as suggested by Ron, one of the sensors in his gearbox failed and sent a signal that made the system put the gearbox in Neutral, than there is no way to kickstart that sensor again.
We aren't talking about a software bug and a software restart here.
Failed "hardware" components do not self-repair.



The idea of Hamilton having a transient problem with his gearbox is entirely plausible provided there wasn't a catastrophic failure of his hardware, and we can see from the performance of his car in the rest of the race that that wasn't the case.

The exceptional performance of the "hardware" during the rest of the race leads me to think that there was no car related problem at all, just a finger or mind slip under pressure.

[Malbec]

Are you kidding?
If, as suggested by Ron, one of the sensors in his gearbox failed and sent a signal that made the system put the gearbox in Neutral, than there is no way to kickstart that sensor again.
We aren't talking about a software bug and a software restart here.
Failed "hardware" components do not self-repair.

Failure of some hardware components is the exact reason for having those redundancy systems and alternative software pathways in the first place, to compensate for their failure.

What do you think the point of having redundancy systems is?

[ioan]

Failure of some hardware components is the exact reason for having those redundancy systems and alternative software pathways in the first place, to compensate for their failure.

What do you think the point of having redundancy systems is?

Software can't make up for a hardware failure. How are they supposed to replace a defective sensor with an alternative software.
If it were possible to do it than they would not need sensors anymore and as a result they would have less failures, not to mention that it would be way cheaper.
I'm afraid however that it's not yet done.

[Malbec]

Software can't make up for a hardware failure. How are they supposed to replace a defective sensor with an alternative software.
If it were possible to do it than they would not need sensors anymore and as a result they would have less failures, not to mention that it would be way cheaper.
I'm afraid however that it's not yet done.

I'm afraid it IS done and has been part of F1 design for a long while.

The software doesn't repair the hardware, alternative pathways are used that ignore the input from the failed bit of hardware, the failure of which would otherwise 'crash' the controlling software.

This kind of software design is derived from the military which uses complex electronic equipment that HAS to keep functioning despite having some integral hardware being damaged or destroyed in action. Obviously F1 redundancy systems are nowhere near as robust and can cope with much less damage but it is designed in to ensure that the failure of a 50 pence sensor doesn't bring a multi-million dollar racecar to a crashing halt.

Sometimes the alternative systems aren't sufficient to make up for minor failures and the car fails, many times they compensate but there's a loss in performance, other times there is no drop in performance. It is entirely conceivable that Hamilton suffered from such a problem in Brazil.

[BDunnell]

I'm afraid it IS done and has been part of F1 design for a long while.

The software doesn't repair the hardware, alternative pathways are used that ignore the input from the failed bit of hardware, the failure of which would otherwise 'crash' the controlling software.

This kind of software design is derived from the military which uses complex electronic equipment that HAS to keep functioning despite having some integral hardware being damaged or destroyed in action. Obviously F1 redundancy systems are nowhere near as robust and can cope with much less damage but it is designed in to ensure that the failure of a 50 pence sensor doesn't bring a multi-million dollar racecar to a crashing halt.

Sometimes the alternative systems aren't sufficient to make up for minor failures and the car fails, many times they compensate but there's a loss in performance, other times there is no drop in performance. It is entirely conceivable that Hamilton suffered from such a problem in Brazil.

I suspect this comment will now be ignored in favour of continuing to have a 'belief'... ;)

I suspect this comment will now be ignored in favour of continuing to have a 'belief'... ;)

I for one can accept it.

Not that it matters if it was a software glitch, a hardware glitch or a driver glitch....it was a Mclaren glitch and as a Ferrari fan that is all that matters.

Taking the thread back on to topic, I don't necessarily see it as a 'choke' by anyone at Mclaren, rather I see it as a monumental lack of judgement by the team to give Hamilton the strategies they did in China & Brazil.

If you remember in 2005, Renault deliberately held Alonso back from racing the Mclaren's. That couldn't have just been a case of asking Fernando not to, but also selecting a conservative fuel strategy and a conservative engine-performance strategy. Renault, wisely, realised that with such a big lead in the championship there was nothing to be gained by using potential race-winning and/or risky strategies.

Mclaren, on the other hand, seemed to use a potential race-winning strategy on Hamilton's car and letting him loose in it. It's hard to blame Hamilton for then trying to race it, but why on earth give him the chance to race for the title when it was the only strategy available that could potentially, and in fact in reality did, cost him the title?

For the life of me I do not understand that. Mclaren could easily have taken a conservative route in race strategy and still have come out of one of the last two GP's with a fourth or fifth place.

Therefore, rather than saying that anybody 'choked' it, I rather take the view that Mclaren threw it away. All on their own.

I cannot think of a more embarrasing end to a title battle.

[BDunnell]

I cannot think of a more embarrasing end to a title battle.

I think Japan 1990 was far more embarrassing for F1 as a whole, because the action that 'decided' the championship at that race was much worse in itself than a strategic error.

I think Japan 1990 was far more embarrassing for F1 as a whole, because the action that 'decided' the championship at that race was much worse in itself than a strategic error.

I understand what you mean, and Jerez 97 is certainly in a similar vein, but I'm thinking more in terms of embarrassment for a team rather than an individual or the sport as a whole.

[TL]

For the life of me I do not understand that. Mclaren could easily have taken a conservative route in race strategy and still have come out of one of the last two GP's with a fourth or fifth place.

Therefore, rather than saying that anybody 'choked' it, I rather take the view that Mclaren threw it away. All on their own.

again..I want to refer to Ferrari's strategy in Japan ? They where lucky there cars didn't get stuck in some gravel trap while spinning..McL was unlucky Lewis did end up in the gravel trap and got stuck

[tinchote]

They published today an interview with Pedro de la Rosa (http://www.lanacion.com.ar/deportiva/nota.asp?nota_id=957253&pid=3415144&toi=5320) in an Argentinean newspaper.

He was asked about what happened to LH, and he says that it was some kind of failure, not a mistake by him. He also answered something that was asked in this thread, and that is that they moved LH from two to three stops to clear him of traffic.

[f1rocks]

I think most of you forgot one crucial thing. Mclaren screwed up more than LH. There was no reason to change from a 2 stop to a 3 stopper. He would have still done it had they not changed the strategy.

Secondly why didnt they just bench Alonso. To hell with what media or FIA says. They dont own Mclaren..Like Flavio said, if they had benched Alonso Lewis would have clinched the WDC in China itself by driving conservatively...


Mclaren are more to blame with the stupid equal driver policy. Alonso has shown no team spirit or leadership and continues to run his mouth against his own team..

If a driver would have done this against Ferrari I can assure you that he would have been sacked long time. Mclaren sux and they will continue to suck big time with stupid strategies and poor management decision...

[passmeatissue]

Ron's view is that if you tell a driver he's no 2 and can't win, he will lose motivation.

I agree about the Brazil strategy, the early supersofts for Lewis always looked a bad idea. But according to itv-f1.com (http://www.itv-f1.com/Feature.aspx?Type=General&PO_ID=41184) they would have got away with it, except that when they looked at his stint1 tyres they realised they couldn't run a third stint to the end, because the tyres wouldn't last. So then they had to switch him to a 3-stopper and that was that.

[ioan]

I'm afraid it IS done and has been part of F1 design for a long while.

The software doesn't repair the hardware, alternative pathways are used that ignore the input from the failed bit of hardware, the failure of which would otherwise 'crash' the controlling software.

This kind of software design is derived from the military which uses complex electronic equipment that HAS to keep functioning despite having some integral hardware being damaged or destroyed in action. Obviously F1 redundancy systems are nowhere near as robust and can cope with much less damage but it is designed in to ensure that the failure of a 50 pence sensor doesn't bring a multi-million dollar racecar to a crashing halt.

Sometimes the alternative systems aren't sufficient to make up for minor failures and the car fails, many times they compensate but there's a loss in performance, other times there is no drop in performance. It is entirely conceivable that Hamilton suffered from such a problem in Brazil.

Let's suppose that you are right and they used software alternatives to ignore the failed part's signals.
So if they did what you say please tell us how was it done?
Is it automatic?
Is it done manually (I very much doubt it)?

There is no pit to car electronic communication (only the radio) so we can exclude that it was done real time by the engineers.

The most interesting part is that they didn't have a valid explanation about what failed. If it was a software glitch or if a sensor failed and than it's signals were excluded using a pre-established routine than they would have known what happened in a matter of seconds, after all it was all in their computers, they monitor everything on the car in real time.

[Malbec]

Let's suppose that you are right and they used software alternatives to ignore the failed part's signals.
So if they did what you say please tell us how was it done?
Is it automatic?
Is it done manually (I very much doubt it)?

There is no pit to car electronic communication (only the radio) so we can exclude that it was done real time by the engineers.

The most interesting part is that they didn't have a valid explanation about what failed. If it was a software glitch or if a sensor failed and than it's signals were excluded using a pre-established routine than they would have known what happened in a matter of seconds, after all it was all in their computers, they monitor everything on the car in real time.

You don't need to suppose I'm right, that is simply the way it is :wink:

The engineers on the pitwall are able to detect the problem via telemetry and the driver can help feed back how it feels from his end. It is then up to the driver to try different software using menus and button combinations on his steering wheel with advice from the engineers, the same way they select different engine mappings for different periods of quali/racing.

I'm not really concerned how McLaren presented the failure to the press, it is not their intention (nor that of any other team) to enlighten the fan but to give enough information for things to sound plausible without letting anything sensitive away. I'm sure they are quite happy to have people guessing exactly what happened and how much responsibility lay with the engineers and with Lewis himself.

[ioan]

You don't need to suppose I'm right, that is simply the way it is :wink:

All this modesty! ;)


The engineers on the pitwall are able to detect the problem via telemetry and the driver can help feed back how it feels from his end. It is then up to the driver to try different software using menus and button combinations on his steering wheel with advice from the engineers, the same way they select different engine mappings for different periods of quali/racing.

May be. But 30 seconds was IMO to short to find out what it is, decide what and how to do, transmit it to the driver who than has to use a limited combination of dials to clear everything.

I stay by my opinion, it was a system re-initialization due to having pushed the wrong button. ;)


I'm not really concerned how McLaren presented the failure to the press, it is not their intention (nor that of any other team) to enlighten the fan but to give enough information for things to sound plausible without letting anything sensitive away. I'm sure they are quite happy to have people guessing exactly what happened and how much responsibility lay with the engineers and with Lewis himself.

I think that the competition knew straight away what happened with Lewis car (finger slip that is :p : ).

[Hawkmoon]

I think most of you forgot one crucial thing. Mclaren screwed up more than LH. There was no reason to change from a 2 stop to a 3 stopper.

The reason they had to change his strategy was that Hamilton was giving his Bridgestones a beating. It would have been Shanghai Part II if they tried to run a full two-stop stint on the softer tyre.

The question, perhaps, is should they have run the softer tyre in the last stint and made that stint the shorter of the three? The track would have been a bit kinder on the softer tyre at the end of the race and there would have conceivably been less traffic for Hamilton to negotiate. They would also have known whether he had a legitimate shot at the title and could have gone for broke if necessary.

[f1rocks]

The reason they had to change his strategy was that Hamilton was giving his Bridgestones a beating. It would have been Shanghai Part II if they tried to run a full two-stop stint on the softer tyre.

The question, perhaps, is should they have run the softer tyre in the last stint and made that stint the shorter of the three? The track would have been a bit kinder on the softer tyre at the end of the race and there would have conceivably been less traffic for Hamilton to negotiate. They would also have known whether he had a legitimate shot at the title and could have gone for broke if necessary.

Alonso was on a 2 stoppper and he was fine driving in cruise mode. In ShangHai it was raining and LH messed up the inters. There was no rain in Brazil. The super soft worked fine for everyone in the final stint when rubber was laid down on the track. Mclaren over reacted like they always do. LH had a better chance on a 2 stopper no matter what crap Ron says...

Also on a 3 stopper he had to overtake the same guys multiple times and thus he lost time doing this. I knew if something bad happened Mclaren would mess it all up as they were not prepared for that. Thats exactly what they did..

[Hawkmoon]

Alonso was on a 2 stoppper and he was fine driving in cruise mode. In ShangHai it was raining and LH messed up the inters. There was no rain in Brazil. The super soft worked fine for everyone in the final stint when rubber was laid down on the track. Mclaren over reacted like they always do. LH had a better chance on a 2 stopper no matter what crap Ron says...

Also on a 3 stopper he had to overtake the same guys multiple times and thus he lost time doing this. I knew if something bad happened Mclaren would mess it all up as they were not prepared for that. Thats exactly what they did..

In Shanghai the same tyres that Hamilton wore down to the belts were just fine on Raikkonen's Ferrari and the sister McLaren of Alonso. Hamilton is harder on his tyres than Alonso, McLaren admit as such.

I don't think McLaren's strategy caused Hamilton to fail to re-capture his title chance. It may not have helped but I think Hamilton's inability to make the soft tyres last longer whilst maintaining a race winning pace has more to do with it.

[wmcot]

I don't think McLaren's strategy caused Hamilton to fail to re-capture his title chance. It may not have helped but I think Hamilton's inability to make the soft tyres last longer whilst maintaining a race winning pace has more to do with it.

I believe it was a combination of the two plus the added glitch/error in Lewis's car. It's rare that one single thing causes a blown race these days, now that engines are bullet-proof.

[Tazio]

I say Hamilton "Choked"!

[Dzeidzei]

I say Hamilton "Choked"!

What amazes me is that people still go on and on about this. Why is it important, who choked and who´s to blame? It wont change anything. F1 is a team sport where every part of the team has to work if you want results. Its quite obvious that the McL team was not up to their task in the last 2 races. That still does NOT justify saying that Lewis really deserved to be the champion.

Thats not how it goes. The WDC is won by the driver who collects most points. Lewis will get another change. Even Kimi did after the silver piece of junk let him down so many times.

[ArrowsFA1]

What amazes me is that people still go on and on about this. Why is it important, who choked and who´s to blame? It wont change anything. F1 is a team sport where every part of the team has to work if you want results.
Absolutely right :up: but the idea the Hamilton "choked" just shows how fans put the emphasis on drivers alone. The drivers and their personalities, failings, abilities, errors etc etc give us the human interest that is central to the sport, and gets everyone fired up. The team factors i.e. reliability, tyre wear rate, car performance etc that go towards winning simply do not do that.

[BDunnell]

Absolutely right :up: but the idea the Hamilton "choked" just shows how fans put the emphasis on drivers alone.

And the mentality of many modern F1 'fans', I'd say.

[Big Ben]

Seems that the team believes that they know better than Hamilton what button he did press on his steering wheel.

LH admitted himself that he made a mistake. Why does Ron feel the need to always give another version than what really happens?!
This man lives in denial of the reality.

He's not living in denial. Imagine you were stupid enough (like him) to bet all your money on a rookie when you have a 2 times wdc in your team and this wonder kid manages to score 2 points in the last 2 races losing a 17 points advantage. I would blame the damn car all day long too. Add to this the fact that McLaren hasn't won anything in the last 8 seasons ... I think.

[ioan]

He's not living in denial. Imagine you were stupid enough (like him) to bet all your money on a rookie when you have a 2 times wdc in your team and this wonder kid manages to score 2 points in the last 2 races losing a 17 points advantage. I would blame the damn car all day long too. Add to this the fact that McLaren hasn't won anything in the last 8 seasons ... I think.

I can't imagine being that stupid! ;)
But you are right he won't admit it publicly that he supported the wrong driver for the title and that's why they didn't get a championship title, again!

[BDunnell]

Er, why did he support the wrong driver for the title? Slowing Hamilton down to favour Alonso — because that's what it would have taken to get Alonso in front of Hamilton on many occasions — would have been unfair, and it was also unnecessary.

Thinking that driver A would have a better chance of winning the title than driver B is no reason to try and favour driver A if driver B is ahead in the title race on points. Hamilton was ahead of Alonso on points. Why try and get Alonso ahead of him? What good would that have done if he wasn't as fast? And don't forget that Alonso had a perfectly good championship chance at Interlagos too, but didn't manage to win the title either.

The team factors i.e. reliability, tyre wear rate, car performance etc that go towards winning simply do not do that.

Except that tyre wear rates and when to change tyres are judged also from the pitwall and the final call is made by a human being.

Race strategies, though often devised by computer simulations, are dependant on a human being making a judging call also, and these in turn effect tyre choices and then tyre wear rates.

Teams are made up of human beings.

Somewhere in the organization of Mclaren, a human being made the wrong judgement calls.

Personally, I don't think that Hamilton necessarily 'choked' but he certainly was a party to some bad judgement calls.

Again I repeat my view that there were ways in which Mclaren could have avoided the situations that arose at China & Interlagos.

Simply deciding on a conservative race strategy which would have prevented Hamilton being in contention for the win would have decreased his opportunities to make mistakes by racing people he didn't have to.

I seem to remember at Monaco Ron Dennis saying something to the effect that Team Strategies were all about ensuring the result. I still do not understand how, having already perfectly acceptably implemented a team strategy for the perfect result for the team at Monaco, Mclaren then singularly made the totally wrong strategy calls in the last two races, when the results needed were easier to achieve and the overall goal much more significant.....except that, by looking to intently at the finishing line they completely lost it and went to pieces collectively.

I wouldn't term that as 'choking', rather a collective madness. The only person capable of effecting that collective disintegration was not Lewis Hamilton but his boss. It was solely the responsibility of Ron Dennis to make sure that Lewis scored 3 points from the last two GP's, as his is the final call on judgements within the team he is the head of.

So, whilst I don't think it's fair to say that Lewis Hamilton 'choked', maybe it is fair to say that Ron Dennis 'choked'.

[ArrowsFA1]

Except that tyre wear rates and when to change tyres are judged also from the pitwall and the final call is made by a human being.

Race strategies, though often devised by computer simulations, are dependant on a human being making a judging call also, and these in turn effect tyre choices and then tyre wear rates.

Teams are made up of human beings.
Absolutely :up: but you don't get fans cheering on the strategists :)

Absolutely :up: but you don't get fans cheering on the strategists :)

That depends on if the fan primarily supports a driver or a team. For example, some of the Tifosi think that Ross Brawn should be made the Patron Saint of Tactics.

Well, when I say 'some', I mean me.

But for some strange reason, the Vatican has never replied to my letters.

[BDunnell]

That depends on if the fan primarily supports a driver or a team. For example, some of the Tifosi think that Ross Brawn should be made the Patron Saint of Tactics.

Well, when I say 'some', I mean me.

But for some strange reason, the Vatican has never replied to my letters.

They're too busy having the McCann parents to tea and dealing with all those abuse claims, presumably...

[janneppi]

Er, why did he support the wrong driver for the title? Slowing Hamilton down to favour Alonso — because that's what it would have taken to get Alonso in front of Hamilton on many occasions — would have been unfair, and it was also unnecessary.

Thinking that driver A would have a better chance of winning the title than driver B is no reason to try and favour driver A if driver B is ahead in the title race on points. Hamilton was ahead of Alonso on points. Why try and get Alonso ahead of him? What good would that have done if he wasn't as fast? And don't forget that Alonso had a perfectly good championship chance at Interlagos too, but didn't manage to win the title either.
Indeed, If anything, McLaren should have bet on Hamilton and have Alonso do an extra pitstops at Monza and and Spa, those three points would have meant a title for Hamilton.

[ioan]

Indeed, If anything, McLaren should have bet on Hamilton and have Alonso do an extra pitstops at Monza and and Spa, those three points would have meant a title for Hamilton.

Not really, Kimi might have been 2nd in Monza and would have had 2 more points which would have put him equal with LH but with more race wins! :p :

[markabilly]

Louie "I am cooler than kimi" Hamster choked, pure and simple, because of his own big mouth----and does NOT have the guts to admit it...

After Japan, he claims he had visions of Senna in his head, again words from his mouth, he then says I WILL BE a worthy champion....with two races to go.....
Why? Reason is simple----
give thos points to Scott not Speed, and put him in the MAc for the last two races, and he would not be slipping it into neutral or driving in kitty litter rather than pavement in the pits ....or Jensen Button, or DC, RB, RS, the Kube or Vettel, or Nico Rosberg or Massa or even more to the point, FA,.....heckfire, even Sato.....all would be WDC right now....

Biggest mouth, most selfish behavior, and the biggest choker, are awards most deserved by him

[Tazio]

Let’s just assume we all watched the same f1 season.
I'll assume my contemporaries on this forum have competed at a high level of sporting competition,
like myself. That you have felt intense pressure in defining moments of an event.
and, that you are not just trying to soften, or reconcile in your mind
that Lewis is not responsible for personally blowing a 17 point lead to the eventual winner.
He couldn't close the deal!!
THIS CAT CHOKED!!!!!!!!
You may not like the term, but it's a perfect fit.

[SGWilko]

Tifosi think that Ross Brawn should be made the Patron Saint of Tactics.

He also ought to be recognised for his efforts for advocating the eating of bananas on prime time telly.

If that man had more than one banana on the pit wall, you knew he was cooking up a good tactical manoeuver........

Bananas, brain food for the gifted