3rd place for Hamilton
•
7 Sep 2008, 17:50
•
Journals
+25 seconds for Hamilton
Massa
Heidfeld
HamiltonI don't liek Lewis, so good decision
Waiting for Ronner's statement! :-D
Update: Glock lost his 8th place, but who cares
+25 seconds for Hamilton
Massa Heidfeld HamiltonI don't liek Lewis, so good decision
Waiting for Ronner's statement! :-D
Update: Glock lost his 8th place, but who cares
do they also switch cups this way? or can they keep it?:D
http://images.google.com/images?hl=de&q=nicole+scherzinger&btnG=Bilder-Suche&gbv=2
I still feel malicious for Räikkönen.. He's such a retard. Too bad Kovalainen had bad luck as well :<
up
tauno
off
stijn
Don't defend him just cause he's the same language as you, otherwise you can have my name.
Hamiltion clearly didn't get an advantage by cutting the chicance, he was just much quicker.
don't know anything about the situation though
Again you've said it but not registed it yourself. HE GAVE THE ADVANTAGE BACK TO KIMI!
Of course he gave it back and attacked Kimi again, and as I said earlier there is no rule which says your not allowed to try and get the lead back straight away after giving the advantage back to the other driver. And once again it was Kimi's mistake on the corner that gave Lewis the perfect chance to overtake again, he would have been an idiot not to take the chance Kimi had given him.
But its obvious to me that your just not gonna get it, your red tinted glasses blind you from seeing it in an impartial way, so we'll have to agree to disagree.
if it was Schumacher that was involved, it could be possible that I would be biased. But from an objective point of view by someone who has a lot of F1 experience and knowledge, the decision is right. It was not a coincidence that I said it right away that Hamilton should get a penalty for taking the lead this way.
"..maybe it's time for you to take off your Hamilton/McLaren glasses."
Its also funny you should mention that, why do you assume that I'm pro McLaren/Hamilton? It it cos I disagreed with you? Fyi, I actually prefer Ferrari over McLaren and while I like what Lewis is doing for the sport thats because the past few years I've lost all interest in the sport and by an off chance I watched it today (1st race in about 3 years).
I have no hidden agenda and certainly no bitternes towards any team (unlike some).
But as I said, neither of us are going to change our minds so we'll have to agree to disagree.
Or in other words: Is it Lewis fault that he was faster than Kimi?
So, the problem was: after Hamilton gave the lead back to Kimi, he stayed in lee just behind Kimi, and that's a big advantage when there isn't any wind to slow down your car. So, it was easy to bypass from there, that's why the McLaren was much quicker there. Also, anyways the distance would have been longer between them, because Kimi would have started accelerating from that corner as first.
WEHEII!
Those people that know way more about f1 driving than you or me would need pretty good reasons to do such a thing. And i dont think its a coincidence that they agree with what i saw.
And raikkonen didnt "close" the door, hamilton just decided to keep pushing untill he had no choice to cut the chicane. Raikkonen was just following the chicane and hamilton should have done the same, not try some impossible manouvre resulting in him cutting the chicane. As far as im concerned he knew what he was doing. And the fact that he slowed down just enough to make raikkonen stay ahead of him doesnt mean that he didnt get an advantage from cutting it... Just look at what CS4f1 said below
And the relation between the FIA and Ferrari, as their most important team, is quite known. In addition, the FIA is interested in an exciting finish of the world championsship, because of marketing issues.
Finally, the stats are proving your are mistaken.
Kimi sux
So, maybe Hamilton will get the victory back...
It clearly is, judging by the drivers involved.
FIArrari.
Looking back at it, it's even more clear that Hamilton's penalty is deserved. Look at how he's already back on full throttle when he's still side-by-side with Raikkonen. Hamilton uses that speed at the end of the straight to cut accross the back of Raikkonen to take the lead into the first corner.
- Hamilton was 6 km/h slower when they crossed the finish line
- he lifted
Furthermore he was ahead going into that corner.
But in the Hamilton-Raikkonen case the rule specifically says "you are only allowed to cut a chicane if you can prove that you didn't get any advantage out of it". After cutting the chicane Hamilton had to prove that he didn't benefit from it. Yet he came out in front of Raikkonen, he hesitated on the throttle for a bit, but he was already back on full again while him and Raikkonen were running side by side. Raikkonen barely managed to get in front, but it wasn't enough to maintain the lead going into the first corner. Hamilton clearly used cutting the chicane to keep his battle with Raikkonen going without backing off at any point.
Compare it to someone who cuts the chicane and takes the fastest lap of the race. He can argue that he would've taken the fastest lap anyway because of fast times in sector 1 and 2. But it's unreasonable to expect the stewards of the meeting to give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't get an advantage out of it.
And about your "proof" that Hamilton was 6 km/h slower when they crossed the finish line. Doh, he lifted for a split second to let Raikkonen pass him, but he was already building up speed again when they crossed the line. 6 km/h is absolutely nothing. Just watch the video, Hamilton wasn't even close to handing back the lead in an obvious way.
The rule doesn't say that.
Read: http://www.crossfire.nu/?x=journal&mode=item&id=66690#comment1323891