Comments on: Kimi Raikkonen edges Giancarlo Fisichella for win (Belgian Grand Prix review)

By: Mormo

Mormo — Thu, 25 Nov 2010 07:40:51 +0000

agree
he does not need to cheat for a win

By: Jarmo

Jarmo — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:44:43 +0000

If it gives advantage – why not drive wide on every lap?

By: Nik

Nik — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 14:40:32 +0000

Looking plainly at the facts:

Regardless of whether it was intentional or not, at the exact moment Raikkonen went off the track he was in 4th, line-astern with a BMW and Trulli and close behind the other BMW. The exact moment he returns to the track he is line-astern with Heidfeld for 3rd. At no point in between these events do any of three other cars touch each other, get in each other’s way, or at any point have to get out of throttle.

If the run-off area is a disadvantage then, logic dictates that Raikkonen should have re-joined in 5th, even with KERS because off-track there is less grip. At the very least, the two forces would cancelled each other out and Raikkonen would have rejoined line-astern in 4th place. But he was in joint 3rd.

It really is funny to see the Kimi and Ferrari brigade spam YouTube comments and places like this and attempt to obstruct debate by claiming everyone else is biased. You would have thought those who are usually at the centre of conspiracy theories would act a little less aggressively, as if they had something to hide. Did Kimi deserve to win the race? Yes. But there is no doubt that some part of that win came from a dodgy manoeuvre. It’s irrelevant that he probably would have won anyway (although not if he’d had to serve a drive-through). Hamilton would have won anyway last year, and look what was decided there.

I’ve been saying it since last year and the incident in Valencia with Webber and Button, where the place was given back some time after the incident only served to convince me: get rid of these silly penalties, replace them with the order to give back the place, and apply them uniformly from the race this new rule is first used. This latest incident says more about the flawed decision-making and punishments surrounding this issue than anything else. At least put in those foam obstacles you can see at Monza’s first corner to force any wandering drivers to take a line that will lose them time – after all, this sport is supposed to be about the best standard of driving, and mistakes should be punished (as safely as possible).

By: al_amana

al_amana — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 06:13:49 +0000

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeer when did Hamilton win a race driving a slower car? I agree with Schumi being one but Hamilton? I would say the other would be Alonso.
As for the remark above on Kimi out racing Fisi due to KERS. I believe that’s a contradiction in terms. Either he out raced Fisi fair and square using everything at his disposal as a F1 – Ferrari driver or it was KERS that beat Fisi and Kimi was just a bystander. The point being made by Theo was that if Fisi had his time over again (assuming he’s as good a driver as they say) he would have done a beter job at keeping Kimi behind at the restart. Then it has also been pointed out that with a better pit stop strategy Fisi could have regained the lead after the first round of stops, even if that meant short fueling him at said stop.
I think that it’s a pretty cheap shot when someone is engaged in mature conversation and all those opposite can come up with is “learn your stuff”!

By: Scribe

Scribe — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 22:57:44 +0000

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeer
Hamilton?
Schumacher? Bennetton often didn’t have the fastest car

By: Scribe

Scribe — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 22:50:34 +0000

Kimi outraced fisi at the restart in a large part due to KERS

learn your stuff

By: PINTOJ

PINTOJ — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 18:43:50 +0000

It’s really fun reading expert comments about Kimi’s
extravagant use of KERS and grip/no grip analysis on the outside of that firt corner.Give your playstation
a rest! {and give the man a break.)

By: GeorgeK

GeorgeK — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:33:32 +0000

“It wasn’t illegal to do so, then why shouldn’t it be used?”

Because the racing should be contained on the track?? I understand your comment about the legality of it (which I question), it’s the logic that escapes me.

Any driver can attempt a pass on the outside of another car, carrying way too much speed, then run wide, and flat out accelerate up the run off area and complete the pass? Under the pretext of avoiding a collision?

Something entirely wrong with that concept. Leave the track to protect your car (and others), but no one should gain track position by that maneuver.

By: Nitpicker

Nitpicker — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 12:42:39 +0000

Isn’t it incredible that there are no back markers any more?

It might have something to do with Spa being a 4 mile circuit…

By: a finn

a finn — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 12:24:55 +0000

Kimi didn’t do anything wrong, if he would have done then he would have got a penalty for it. Maybe he got some advantage out of it, but it’s not his fault that others didn’t use that possibility. It wasn’t illegal to do so, then why shouldn’t it be used? Remember that everyone could have done that, and still wouldn’t have got any penalty.