The 2006 Hungarian Grand Prix is an interesting one. Raikkonen led and crashed (something you may have overlooked), handing the lead to Alonso who then had a wheel nut problem (something you acknowledge).
In this case, Raikkonen retired from, or lost, the lead 7 times due to both mechanical and ‘non-mechanical non-driver’ issues (rather than 6).
Alonso was already 37 seconds ahead of Raikkonen before he crashed into a Toro Rosso. With an average pit stop in the refueling era taking about 25 seconds, Alonso had already effectively jumped Raikkonen in the first stint.
“Raikkonen led and crashed “
That’s hardly a ‘non-driver issue’, is it?
@mnmracer! Great stuff, excellent! Twi things i noticed:
1. Alonso has inherited many races, but that’s why he is always pushing the leader when he goes second. Sometimes that push pays the reward of making the leader lose concentration, overheat something and then retire.
2. I agree with @freelittlebirds that “Vettel has more failures on the lead because he is usually leading”. Even when sometimes the car has failed “without a reason”, we can also assume that Vettel, pushing the car so much, makes it fail from time to time.
I wonder how many races Mansell inherited, so we can compared this fact to Alonso.
Alonso has inherited many races, but that’s why he is always pushing the leader when he goes second … we can also assume that Vettel, pushing the car so much, makes it fail from time to time.
Well, I’m not sure why one drivers “pushing” should make the car fail while another drivers pushing does not. That’s just another way of saying the Ferrari has been more reliable than the RB.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.