Alonso says extra pit stops “does not favour” Ferrari

2011 F1 season

Fernando Alonso, Ferrari, 2011

Fernando Alonso, Ferrari, 2011

Fernando Alonso says he is “not keen” on having more pit stops during races in 2011.

Speaking to media in Madrid he said: ??From what we have seen so far, degradation is very significant, which means we will have races with lots of pit stops.

“I?m not keen on that because I think this increased uncertainty does not favour the strongest teams: it?s as if in football, it was decided to have a penalty per team each half hour in which case Barcelona and Real Madrid would not be jumping for joy.

“However, the situation is the same for everyone: it will be important to be fastest because I don?t think we can make one stop less than our main rivals.??

He added it was too soon to make predictions about Ferrari’s performance:

“We will only really know where we stand compared to the others when we are in Melbourne.

“At the moment, I am happy because we proved to have a reliable car.

“If all goes to plan, we will be in the group of teams capable of fighting for the title, along with Red Bull the reigning champions, McLaren, Mercedes and also Renault, who had already made a step forward towards the end of last season. Even Toro Rosso has made significant progress.??

2011 F1 season


Browse all 2011 F1 season articles

Image ?? Ferrari spa/Ercole Colombo

Promoted content from around the web | Become an F1 Fanatic Supporter to hide this ad and others

Advert | Go Ad-free

150 comments on Alonso says extra pit stops “does not favour” Ferrari

1 2 3
  1. Fernando has a point but more pit stops will improve the racing for sure…

  2. US_Peter (@us_peter) said on 28th February 2011, 19:50

    He’d prefer of course if everyone followed The Horse Whisperer’s script he’s written, in which Massa follows Alonso across the finish line ahead of all other teams at each race…

    Fortunately for the fans, increased uncertainty IS a good thing.

    • He wasn’t talking about what is good for the fans, he was simply saying that it won’t favor the faster teams in response to a question about how it will effect the driving….not the fans. And as many have pointed out, this will shake things up by making more of a show, but will also potentially lessen the pure racing by deciding positions in the pits.

      Personally, I think a little more degradation than last year will be nice. Maybe not more pits stops, but just more of a struggle on the tires. this will not only help the show, but will also make the drivers work harder….

    • Increase uncertainty IS NOT a good thing.
      Increase RACING IS a good thing.

      • Maciek said on 1st March 2011, 8:08

        Well the two kind of go together, no?

      • Mike said on 1st March 2011, 8:10

        Errr, Obviously Alonso said it’s not good for him, and he’s right.

        But I think for us, increased uncertainty is fantastic. What it means is its not only Red Bull, Mclaren and Ferrari who have a chance.

  3. eternalsunshine said on 28th February 2011, 19:51

    I’d prefer that the race be decided not on the pits.

    • Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 28th February 2011, 20:00

      Thing is…I’ve been saying the same thing for a long while, but when a race is dull, sometimes it’s the pit stops that keep it going. That’s why races like Barcelona were even worse last year, only one stop to mix it up.

      • BasCB (@bascb) said on 1st March 2011, 7:28

        The problem with pitstops last year was, almost all cars stopped in about 2-3 laps at many races, and the tyres showed it was just a gimmick.

        With more pitstops and bigger difference between the tyres there is more of a chance of doing something different.
        And that might make for better racing. Someone trying to save tyres to have a stop less or get newer tyres at the end. Someone else going full out with 2 stints on softer tyres to take it agressive.
        Hope it will work out fine, but to be sure I am rather not expecting too much of it.

    • jess said on 1st March 2011, 2:20

      not me, it is a bit of fun. and adds to the “team thing”

    • sato113 (@sato113) said on 1st March 2011, 3:52

      yep. imagine if Turkey 2010 had more pit stops… it would have been a bit boring…

    • sato113 (@sato113) said on 1st March 2011, 3:53

      yep. imagine if Turkey 2010 had more pit stops… it would have been a bit boring… not as intense

  4. Alejanddro said on 28th February 2011, 19:59

    Is he comparing Ferrari pitstops with penalty kicks? you never know where the ball will end up?
    If i was a Ferrari mechanic i wouldn’t feel particularly encouraged….

    • Last year they were perfect and fundamental during the pits. Just remember Canada and Italy…

    • F1iLike said on 28th February 2011, 21:05

      He has a point. A pit stop is always a gamble. Much bigger risk of loosing time there than on track and/or even failing miserably.. But should improve the show.. Can’t believe how much more stress the drivers will be under this season.. Even more than usual.

      • BasCB (@bascb) said on 1st March 2011, 7:31

        I suppose that’s it. Taking uncertainty out lessens the chances for smaller teams to spring a suprise (or bigger ones to mess up).

        Normally that is why rules are changed in sports, so that the big teams do not make it a league of only 2 or 3 for the top spots just by spending.

    • No, that is not what he meant.

  5. Well, he’s just worried that Hamilton might block him. :P

  6. Translation: “Our strategists would probably fail unless it’s a boring race. Leave them alone and never ask them to think anything seriously.”

  7. Hi Keith.
    I think it should say not keen on having, instead of “Fernando Alonso says he is “not keen” on the having more pit stops during races in 2011.”

    Cheers, and thank you for your hard work on this amazing site!

  8. Joey-Poey (@joey-poey) said on 28th February 2011, 20:05

    I don’t buy it, though. The teams will just as easily figure out the degradation and the pits stops will be just as carefully planned. It’s not an unknown variable, it simply means two pit stops instead of one, which if anything favors Alonso so that he won’t get stuck behind drivers who are only marginally slower for 50 laps.

    I’m still on the fence about this. Yes, it sucked that even the super softs would last an entire race at times. But one upside was that it forced drivers to take action on track rather than leap-frog in the pits. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: the real variety will come when they open it up to allow them to use any set at any point. They can still limit the amount they are allowed. Or hell, they could say “you can pick any of the four, but only two.” Then we’d see cars with tires in different states and would lend itself to passing.

    • spudw said on 2nd March 2011, 14:38

      I’m not really on the fence about anything to do with the fundamental characteristic of the cars, in this case the tires, that will lead to races where the emphasis is on strategy, pit stop timing and on-track passing. Given the characteristics of the cars, prime tires that last 30 laps and options that last 25 will guarantee a boring race.

      Alonso is taking a typical Ferrari view that the rules should cater to their strengths and minimize the risk that they will actually have to do the work on-track and in the pits to win anything.

  9. Bonedwarf said on 28th February 2011, 20:06

    You’re only as good as your last race, which means Alonso isn’t very good. HAHA!

    Anyhoo it’s sad to see whining like this. I read that as moaning about winning now being harder. Regardless of the motive, the fact is it does add uncertainty and may actually encourage them to overtake on track.

    I mean dumping refueling livened up F1, as I and my friends predicted all the way back in the mid 90’s. (Too bad it took so long.) But if we can see something akin to Capelli almost winning in a March simply due to tyre strategy… Then BRING IT ON I say, and screw Ferrari. They always moan when the sport does something that doesn’t favour them.

  10. mcmercslr (@mcmercslr) said on 28th February 2011, 20:09

    Sounds like he is not completely confident of the pace of the new Ferrari. If the carnis fast enough then you can be far enough ahead for a slow-ish pit stop not to bother you. Excuses have started

  11. Reasons to be cheerful, parts one, two and three, methinks…

  12. SennaNmbr1 (@) said on 28th February 2011, 20:33

    Lots of faith in your mechanics, Fernando.

    • fullthrottle said on 28th February 2011, 21:24

      The mechanics showed like the strongest part of the team last year, he can expect no mistakes from them in the pit stops.

      • Pitstops are always uncertain, no matter how good your mechanics are; remember Hungary last year, anyone?

  13. Magnificent Geoffrey (@magnificent-geoffrey) said on 28th February 2011, 20:44

    I’m not keen on more pit stops, either. Wasn’t the whole point of getting rid of refuelling to allow races to be decided on the track and not the pit lane?

    • Red Andy (@red-andy) said on 28th February 2011, 21:04

      Yes, but it was always a strawman argument as was demonstrated thoroughly last year.

      The argument went something like, “Drivers don’t overtake on the track because they just wait for the pit stops.”

      Of course, as many of us pointed out at the time, the reason drivers didn’t overtake was nothing to do with the presence or absence of refuelling stops. It was simply that they couldn’t overtake without resorting to the pit lane, because of aerodynamics and “dirty air” making passing too difficult. (Think about it – if it had been refuelling that had stopped drivers from overtaking, we should have seen much more passing in the closing stages of a race, when there were no stops left. But we never did).

      This position was vindicated last year when there wasn’t significantly more overtaking despite there being fewer pit stops. Because altering the number of pit stops doesn’t solve the root cause of the problem, which is that the design of the cars doesn’t lend itself to enough overtaking.

      • Magnificent Geoffrey (@magnificent-geoffrey) said on 28th February 2011, 21:34

        I agree. Drivers didn’t ‘want’ or choose to wait til rivals pitted to pass them, it was often because they had no other realistic opportunity to do so.

        The thing I’m concerned about is that having more stops will lessen the liklihood of us having straight races to the finish like we had in Turkey last year. After everyone stopped in the early stages, we had the two Bulls and two McLarens right together on the racetrack and had a 40 lap or so sprint to the line and it was tremendously exciting as you knew the result would be decided on the track and not in the pits. With high tyre wear on the new Pirellis, I’m just concerned that the extra stops that may be needed will do away with that sort of a scenario.

        Especially with the return of KERS and the introduction of the AWS, we’re hopefully going to have a year where the disease of dirty air finally begins to be alleviated. So I think it would be a shame if at the same time the racing becomes more dependant on strategy as that would detract from the overall aim, if you see what I’m trying to say.

    • sw6569 (@sw6569) said on 28th February 2011, 21:04

      But then F1 remembered that overtaking in a race is impossible!

      I don’t think more tyre changes will lead to races being decided in the pits. Instead, we should hopefully see what we would have seen last year if the tyres were more marginal – drivers gambling on an extra pitstop for better rubber so that they can overtake on the tract. Similar to what Hamilton/Webber did at Melbourne.

      We unfortunately never got to see the climax of that decision courtesy of Webber forgetting how to brake

      • BBT said on 1st March 2011, 7:34

        But then F1 remembered that overtaking in a race is impossible!

        Errr. Simply not true. It that a joke? Where did this myth come from? Just because the last race I suspect. There was more over taking last season than any of the previous three seasons.

    • MondoL said on 1st March 2011, 9:06

      and to save money. ( less mechanics, less engineering, etc)

  14. Oliver said on 28th February 2011, 20:46

    Lets face the facts, the average pitstop failings are hardly caused by incompetent pit crews. More often than not, they are usually a result of jammed wheel nuts or air guns. And the probability of such happening, increases with every pit stop.
    The man simply doesn’t want to be a victim of chance.

  15. If F1 was like penalties you just know the Germans would win it :-)

    • Magnificent Geoffrey (@magnificent-geoffrey) said on 28th February 2011, 21:39

      …they already do!

    • It’s so true – F1 2011’s unpredictability will match the football World Cup!

      Alonso another Spanish Champion?
      Vettel and the usual German precision?
      Barrichello with experienced Brazillian flair?
      Mclaren representing England, carrying the weight of expectations of a nation…

      Add into it the 107% rule and I’m half expecting Scotland’s Di Resta not to qualify…

      So many parallels!!

      • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 28th February 2011, 21:58

        It’s unlikely di Resta will fail to qualify. The VJM-04 is comfortably within the 107% margin, and based on his Friday running in 2010, di Resta is fairly close to Sutil on pace.

        If you’re worried about someone not making the 107% margin, worry about Virgin, Lotus and Hispania.

        • Actually I think there is a possiblity that quite a few drivers will find themselves outside of 107% – even those who people might not expect. If the tyres go off as quickly as they seem to and they have left time for only one run and make a mistake on their first lap, it could cause them problems. Hopefully though they will have set a time in practice which allows them to start. Actually I expect teams to treat saturday practice qualifying simulations much more seriously than last year, as setting a fast time then could be the difference between making the grid and not.

          • BasCB (@bascb) said on 1st March 2011, 7:35

            Now that would be good, if some 5-10 drivers do not make it through the 107% at the first few races, then get allowed in anyhow.

            That would mean the FIA dropping the rule again after the fly away races, something I really support.

          • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 1st March 2011, 7:41

            It would have to be an incredibly short lap for a driver to be eliminated because he lost three seconds a lap when his tyres went off. If a lap time is 1min 40sec (one hundred seconds), then the 107% margin is a lap time of 1min 47sec. So, according to my crude estimates, the leader would need to set a lap time of just under fifty seconds – somewhere between forty-five and forty-eight – for a driver to be eliminated by his tyres going off. And right now, the circuit with the fastest lap time is Interlagos; Juan Pablo Montoya’s record for the fastest lap is 1:11.473, twenty-five seconds slower than the required lap time needed for the 107% margin to be more than three seconds per lap. The only palce where such a lap time could be reasonably possible is the perimeter layout at Bahrain (or possibly a shortened version of Abu Dhabi or the national circuit at Silverstone … or any other “national” circuit, for that matter, but there are all shorter than the minimum allowable circuit length set by the FIA).

          • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 1st March 2011, 8:30

            Now that would be good, if some 5-10 drivers do not make it through the 107% at the first few races, then get allowed in anyhow.

            That would mean the FIA dropping the rule again after the fly away races, something I really support.

            I seriously doubt anyone will fall victim to it. The only way I could see it happening is if a) a driver crashes during qualifying, or b) qualifying starts out wet, but ends in the dry and the driver is unable to return to the circuit, like with Takuma Sato in Melbourne a few years ago. Even then, the FIA will likely consult the driver’s previous times set in practice and let him race. I don’t think any team is genuinely in danger of failing to qualifiy with at least one of their cars; the only team that faces any uncertainty is Hispania, and even then, we’re only assuming that the F111 will be no better than the F110 (and judging by the renders, we already know the F111 has more sophisticated aerodynamics).

            In short, the 107% rule is a joke. It was only brought in to appease Ferrari after Alonso got blocked by di Grassi in Montreal and Jenson Button was able to pass him. Ferrari complained loudly, and the FIA brought the 107% rule back to satisfy them, even though few believe anyone will be knocked out by it. Even if the 107% rule was used in 2010, I think Hispania would have qualified for more races than they did not, and in most of the races where they would have failed, it only would have been by a few tenths. Monaco was the only circuit where they genuinely woud have struggled to make it.

            The more challenging question in all of this, however, is what the hell was Alonso doing in Montreal? At the time of the incident where he was blocked, Lucas di Grassi was well off the racing line because he knew Alonso was there. And yet Alonso still managed to get held up by him even though the racing line was open …

        • Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 1st March 2011, 7:26

          He’s referring to the fact that Scotland have a hard time qualifying for major football tournaments :)

  16. Andy C said on 28th February 2011, 21:09

    I’m not keen on that because I think this increased uncertainty does not favour the strongest teams

    Perhaps we should skip the races and just have an awards ceremony? I thought the point of F1 is that you need to take part in a race.

    While degradation will be a challenge, it will also put bit of a challenge the teams and the drivers, and the long lost art of managing F1 tyres, and using a bit of strategy.

    Personally I’d like to see more on the edge driving, more marginal tyres (in terms of degradation rather than punctures of course). When was the last time you saw someone on marginal tyres being hunted down by someone who took a risk and went to pit for 10 banzai laps?

    I’m sick of watching cars on rails. Martin Brundle commented on it ages ago that the fact that all of the F1 cars could take the 130r flat without any problem was unheard of in his day.

    The worst thing is, I really rate Alonso, and I dont think he needs to make comments like this, as he’ll be just fine. It puts a premium on the talents that he clearly has….

    • Electrolite said on 1st March 2011, 1:28

      He doesn’t put it all that well does he :P Of course it’s in his best interest that the strongest teams do well though, as he drives for one…

    • Todfod (@todfod) said on 1st March 2011, 6:52

      I do not understand what is wrong with his comment. All he is saying that there will be uncertainty in races, and for cars that are battling right at the front, this is a slight disadvantage. He is just making a very interesting point, and I do not understand how this is connected with ‘skipping all the races and going straight to the awards ceremony’.

      Some people can blow the simplest of comments way out of context.

      • Andy C said on 1st March 2011, 9:01

        I’m not keen on that because I think this increased uncertainty does not favour the strongest teams

        I’m not sure how I’ve blown this comment out of proportion?

        Why should a race series ever automatically favour the better teams. They should be the best teams on merit, and indeed Ferrari, McLaren and Redbull were last year.

        Thats my point, he doesnt need to say these things, and I my personal opinion it detracts from him as a fantastic driver. There are few better drivers in world motorsport.

        • IceMan said on 1st March 2011, 9:09

          Why should a race series ever automatically favour the better teams. They should be the best teams on merit, and indeed Ferrari, McLaren and Redbull were last year

          What are you trying to say? you mean slow cars should be winning?

          • Andy C said on 2nd March 2011, 11:55

            Thats not what i’m saying at all.

            I mean, why should the entire series be setup to favour anyone.

            It should be that if you have the fastest car, and the fastest drivers, who can manage the things they need to (tyres, kers, wing etc) then they will win.

        • bosyber said on 1st March 2011, 9:28

          Well, he was likely asked is he thought the high degradation in general is good for Ferrari (as they seem to keep their tyres pretty well), and answered that you might think that, but in fact the extra uncertainty from more pitstops might well make up for that advantage.

          And it could also be that this answer was in Italian/Spanish and then lost something in translation.

          Let’s not blame drivers for trying to answer a weird question by a journalist/PR-person with an interesting line of thought instead of with bland nonsense.

        • Todfod (@todfod) said on 1st March 2011, 10:27

          @AndyC. Fernando does drive for a top team, so I guess its incredibly selfish of him to think that tyre degradation might affect front runners. What Fernando should actually be thrilled about is the slower teams benefiting the strategic blunders.

          Come on dude, are you seriously trying to tell me that if it this statement was made by either of the Red Bull or Mclaren drivers, we would be having this discussion right now?

          • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 1st March 2011, 10:41

            Fernando does drive for a top team, so I guess its incredibly selfish of him to think that tyre degradation might affect front runners.

            I don’t think it takes a great cynic to realise Alonso’s principle concern is how it affects him.

            are you seriously trying to tell me that if it this statement was made by either of the Red Bull or Mclaren drivers, we would be having this discussion right now?

            We won’t know that until one of them does, which so far they haven’t.

          • Todfod (@todfod) said on 1st March 2011, 11:18

            Every driver’s principle concern is their own championship chances. So when one driver is talking about the effect of tyres on his OWN team, why is such a big deal being made out of it?

          • RaulZ said on 1st March 2011, 12:18

            @AndyC
            I’m sure that nobody would say anything if this is said by other driver. In fact, other drivers say similar things an they don’t generate 130 comments.
            Today is published that Vettel thinks that ‘pay drivers’ are a danger because ‘some of them’ are really anoying obstacles, and that it’s going to be dangerous this year if they have to be pushing averykind of buttons.
            This is two compains in a sentence, and you can think that he’s looking for excuses or trying to blame ‘pay drivers’ when he crashed again.
            In fact, you cannot see that information in here because it’s not really a new.
            On the other hand, publishing this info about Alonso, in a private press conference, is enough to make a post, as you can count 130 comments a the moment.

            He’s really what media needs, so what he could say is not important.

          • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 1st March 2011, 12:27

            Ferrari issued a press release containing Alonso’s comments. I haven’t seen these comments from Vettel.

          • Andy C said on 2nd March 2011, 11:59

            Come on dude, are you seriously trying to tell me that if it this statement was made by either of the Red Bull or Mclaren drivers, we would be having this discussion right now?

            yes I am.

            Are we going down the poor old fernando line here? The guy is a great driver, as ferrari are a great team. But they both look out only for them. Sorry if we dont agree.

            What excludes Fernando from people disagreeing with his comments. I’m sure he doesnt care two hoots what I say about his comments.

          • IceMan said on 3rd March 2011, 7:16

            It’s a bit like driving a car while playing with your mobile phone Sebastian Vettel outlines his concerns about the extra buttons in the cockpit for 2011 – Vettel March 1, 2011

            Now you people say RedBulls are not fast enough like McLaren so Seb whining and making these statement?

  17. Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 28th February 2011, 21:14

    I’ll re-post since my “Edward K” post has disappeared!

    It’s going to be the same for everyone. If Real Madrid only lose a game because Valencia had a penalty, Valencia might also lose because Espanyol got one.

    Personally I hope and look forward to races where pit-stops are a tactical option rather than an inevitability of the rules or optimum fuel loads.

    • GeorgeTuk (@georgetuk) said on 28th February 2011, 21:19

      TBF Icthyes he does say later on that it is the same for everyone.

      I woild much rather see racing on the tracks as not being a mathmatician (or find maths that exciting) pit stops don’t exactly fill me with joy.

  18. Faraz (@faraz) said on 28th February 2011, 21:37

    How can it only favour Ferrari?? If Ferrari benefit from it so can the other top teams.

  19. Adam Tate said on 28th February 2011, 21:39

    Haha! Even Alonso has mentioned Toro Rosso’s improvement, now that’s saying something.

  20. Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 28th February 2011, 21:56

    Man up, Fernando – you said it yourself: it’s the same for everyone.

    • Fermoando Alonso… come on boy, grow a pair..

      • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 28th February 2011, 22:07

        Yes, he does seem to be very good at complaining about things. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, Exhibit A: Germany 2010 and the whole “WAAAAH! I can’t get past Felipe! Somebody make him move over!” when if he really was as fast as he claimed to be, he’d have been able to get past Massa all on is own.

        I rest my case.

        • Faraz (@faraz) said on 28th February 2011, 22:45

          Sorry but if you are talking about complaining then Jenson Button is your man he complained all year about the car.

          Then he is the one who started using Lewis’s set up near the end of the season because he could not go fast enough.

          • Hare said on 1st March 2011, 4:29

            Button speaks about his car, and the balance of his car… Alonso complains about everything else. People being in front of him, other people getting unfair advantages, new rules, new this and that..

            Jenson can only influence his car, and it’s development, that’s his job. He’s paid to be a driver, and develop the car. So when he talks, he talks about that. Fair enough.

            Alonso just complains. It becomes political with him.

          • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 1st March 2011, 7:04

            Sorry but if you are talking about complaining then Jenson Button is your man he complained all year about the car.

            Yeah, but at least McLaren can use Button’s gripes to make the car better.

          • IceMan said on 1st March 2011, 9:17

            Yeah, but at least McLaren can use Button’s gripes to make the car better.

            Or they can get Ferrari’s specification and make the car even better.

        • Julian said on 28th February 2011, 23:07

          If you dont like the way Alonso “moans, whinges, b!tches, etc” then why on earth do you moan, whinge and b!tch about him dude??

          Think about it. :)

          • Faraz (@faraz) said on 28th February 2011, 23:18

            I do not understand your comment I never said anything about Alonso always moaning. PM says that Alonso is the driver who is always moaning. But its not, its Button who’s always complaining.
            True Facts not fiction.

          • Why should you (or anybody) bother to read PM’s comments is beyond me

          • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 1st March 2011, 7:11

            If you dont like the way Alonso “moans, whinges, b!tches, etc” then why on earth do you moan, whinge and b!tch about him dude??

            Because it’s called “giving him a taste of his own medicine”. I live in the vague hope that he actually observes the threads and considers me to be Lex Luthor to his Superman.

            Why should you (or anybody) bother to read PM’s comments is beyond me

            Am I supposed to be intimidated by this? “Oh noes, a series of strategically-arranged zeroes and ones on my computer screen doesn’t like anything I have to say!”

            Pffft. Take a number, buddy. The truth is that a lot of people like what I have to say most of the time, even when my views are controversial (like Bahrain) or subject to my own prejudices (like Alonso). I like to think that I actually contribute something around here, something more than snide remarks about how other people post. Because right now, you’ve shown that you remember things that I’ve said, even if you disagreed with them. I can’t recall a thing you’ve ever commented on. Who’s doing better for himself?

            Also, I have an awesome INCEPTION avatar.

          • Maciek said on 1st March 2011, 9:07

            PM, your views on Bahrain were not controversial. They were just pig-headed, insensitive to people to dying, insensitive to repressive police measures and unfailingly on the side of the authorities.

        • Todfod (@todfod) said on 1st March 2011, 7:10

          @Pm. I do not see you calling Webber a moaner when he asked for more challenging tracks, as that could easily be interpreted as Mark being unsatisfied with the current tracks on the calender. I didn’t see you call Button a moaner when he said that Mclaren was going to off the pace, as it could be Jenson complaining about his car even before the season started.

          I guess haters will just see things how they chose to see it.

          • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 1st March 2011, 7:19

            In the case of Webber and Button, these were legitimate complaints. The truth is that the calendar needs work. A few minor changes to a handful of circuits could easily improve the quality of not just the circuit itself, but of the entire season. And how else was Button supposed to convey dissatisfaction with the way McLaren was slowly faling behind their rivals? Was he supposed to get out of the car and say “Yeah, it’s fantastic; it’s the best car I’ve ever driven” and expect the team to instinctively know what to do to improve it?

            In the case of Alonso, he’s making out that Ferrari will be weakened by multiple pit stops. And this would be a legitimate concern, but then he goes ahead and says that everyone will be faced by the same problem. So how is Ferrari at all disadvantaged by this? If all twelve teams are faced by the same challenge, how is it that eleven of them will get some undisclosed advantage from an extra pit stop when Ferrari – arguably one of the very best at what they do – will be unable to cope to the point where they consistently lose out? In short, what the hell does Alonso have to complain about? It’s as if he said “Oh, no, it’s raining. The Pirelli tyres aren’t very good in the rain. We’re going to strugle with them. But everyboy else will be using the same tyres as we do, and they’ve all reported the same thing”.

          • Todfod (@todfod) said on 1st March 2011, 8:17

            I do not understand the distinction between Webbers, Button’s and Alonso’s comments, and how one can be interpreted as valid concerns, and the other as moaning/whinging/crying/ complaining.

            To me it looks like Alonso made a very valid comment on how uncertainty is likely to cost front runners more than others, and then says that situation could work against others as well, so all they can do is focus on the pace of their car.

            I wouldn’t even classify his comment as a complaint. Honestly, Alonso cannot make any statement whatsoever without haters calling him a whiner. Not every opinion on a potentially difficult situation is a complaint. And lets face it… if it were Vettel, Hamilton, Webber, Rosberg, etc who made said these very exact words, you wouldn’t even be calling it a complaint.

            I guess there is no removing bias in our opinions. Heck, I’ve been biased in commenting on Schumi, Button, Petrov, Karthikeyan, etc. So I guess this whole exercise of trying to justify your statement is just futile.

          • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 1st March 2011, 8:23

            Where have Webber and Button said they don’t like the new tyre rules because it will reduce the advantage they have in driving for a front-running team?

          • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 1st March 2011, 8:51

            I do not understand the distinction between Webbers, Button’s and Alonso’s comments, and how one can be interpreted as valid concerns, and the other as moaning/whinging/crying/ complaining.

            Are you serious, Derek? I just told you that a moment ago.

          • IceMan said on 1st March 2011, 9:21

            @Todfod It’s not worth it.Save your breath.

1 2 3

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.

Skip to toolbar