please log in to view this image please log in to view this image Cannot tell whether it will be an Arai helmet or Schuberth. Would look odd if it is Arai.
http://www.crash.net/f1/news/186750...tm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss I know we have discussed this before - RE: driver input into car development.
Tony Dodgins at Autosport has a pretty low opinion of how a driver develops a car The hidden truths of Schumacher's comeback To pull a quick piece:
Well that is a low blow, what makes a driver an all rounder is the ability too maximise the team and himself/herself. The man sounds really bitter btw. Because Schumacher's comeback was not as successful as he had hoped, people like this guy are jumping on the bandwagon (as expected to be fair).
I do believe that in years gone by that car setup and in season development of parts could be influenced by a driver. For instance, if driver A was consistently quick and gave accurate feedback, then it gave greater potential for the car to be developed in a positive manner. One would assume that with the greatest simulator in the world that the lack of real time testing has reduced driver input further. However, the route cause of the success would surely be down to the enginner who designed the theory/idea or the new part/development on the car? The flip side of the argument is, that maybe they wouldnt design the new part if they didnt feel that that driver A could either evalulate it or maximise it effectively, hense a deminishing return on investment! I suppose what we all overlook is that regardless of how quick, consistent and fortunate a race driver maybe come Sunday afternoons, there are many unsung heros who sit in the background devloping a race package! Maybe we should spare a thought for the now defunct test drivers of yesterayear who would do tens of thousands of testing miles per season - maybe it was their consistent feedback that allowed the engineers to maximise the design theory of the car and the race drivers just delivered what was expected? A vicious circle maybe - egg or chicken?
Thats the impression I got from reading that article... but on the balance of things and the way cars are designed nowadays, he may have a point, engineers have more input on the way car is developed, good feedback from the driver is obviously beneficial but not the be all and end all it was in the past..
I thought this was a strange comment to make given the internal pressure there must have been in convincing MSC to come out of retirement! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...Michael-Schumacher-failure.html#ixzz2FW4iwml8
Schumacher tried the (long-term, nicey nicey treatment) and from what they provided in the last three years they don't deserve that. Hamilton will put pressure on in terms of what he needs and demands from the car by shouting down the teams throat, maybe the hairdryer treatment from Lewis will work in the end, who knows.
Regardless of how Ron is trying to protray it.. it sounds like sour grapes to me... Agree with one of the comments on that link, had Red Bull/Ferrari been in that position with Vettel or Alonso, and no one else was avaialbe of that nature (Hamilton/Kimi) to take their place, you'd bet your bottom dollar they would have come to some sort of an agreement.. Clash of the Ego's if you ask me, in this case it appears Ron Dennis' ego was/is bigger than Hamiltons!
It depends, at the end of the day someone has to pay for the car, Red bull have their energy drink, Ferrari are Ferrari with their very large automotive holdings and McLaren have outside sponsors. Who do you keep happy, the driver or the people who pay the money to ensure the car stays at the front end of the grid? give someone the car and they can win the title in it, but without the car they'll be no where, As Frank Williams famously stated "the car's the star". We don't really know the inside story of what was offered and what was wanted, but my 'suspision' is that Lewis wanted less corporate bollocks (fair enough) but McLaren couldn't/wouldn't agree as they have agreements to sponsors to honour to keep the money coming in.
Hmmm I think Lewis wanted his own personal brands at McLaren to exert far more power within the grid, more than Alonso has with good old Santander. Let's be honest Lewis can exploit himself far more than any other driver on the grid because of his skin colour, skill and nationality, if gold mines came as humans Lewis would be the mother load. He is the only driver able to tackle that unique market and McLaren have been milking him for years and Mercedes will help him get to Beckham status which in 1 way isn't a bad thing considering how F1 works. Simon Fuller is doing his job very well (unlike last year), Lewis' attitude towards the media and public went from one extreme side of being very outspoken and arrogant to the other (Humble, honest, sportsmanlike), the more the public/sponsors gets on his side, the more power he can have getting number 1 status within certain teams because of how much money and talent he would bring. To be honest I was getting worried that Lewis' popularity was going to cause some problems within Red Bull as the team comes first and that Seb was still being outshone by Schumacher still being around, German sponsors were more interested in a past great rather than the up and coming. So I was thinking if Lewis did join in 2013 he would slowly push Seb out and not just because he (might/not) beat him on track but that his popularity would work in his favour and against Seb. Luckily though IRBR want to "prove" their youth products are the best selected drivers in the world and they wouldn't want another top driver to try and discredit that program. So all the best young drivers will want to sign up with IRBR because "they" made the youngest single/double/triple WDC of current time and only Seb has that mantle so now Seb has probably more brand power capability than Lewis and Alonso now.
I honestly don't understand why any driver cares about his sponsorship/brands etc. Surely, after being reminded all the time about how competitive, motivated and driven (sic) these sportsman are, one would imagine that all they desire is the best car/team to achieve victory. Now, obviously having certain sponsors can mean more money in the pot and thus more resources for the car development but surely that's only applicable between smaller/larger teams? Lewis leaving because he feels there's more prestige in winning with a team that he has helped to build (rather than with an established one like Mclaren) is understandable. Lewis leaving because he wants his face associated with some different brands seems a bit overkill to me. I honestly wonder whether we're going to see Lewis being interviewed by a 'Parkinson-esque' personality on TV in 10 years time, with him trying to justify why he still has 1 title due to what turned out to be the worst career decision he ever made. All this at a time when Vettel's pneumatic finger has won his 13th WDC. The point being that, apart from being able to choose what PR stuff you do, I fail to see what sponsors/brands have to do with his move. When given the choice, I'm sure 100% of the grid (with perhaps the exception of Kimi!) would prefer the Mclaren PR schedule to that of another team if it meant the difference between a fantastic car that can achieve WDC or two under their belt and a car that languished in the midfield. Having said all that, things have to change at some point and Mercedes may end up doing very well......or they may end up doing a Toyota/BMW. With Mclaren, Red Bull, Ferrari and Lotus they're going to find it extremely difficult.
http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1...s-Hamilton-has-joined-Mercedes-at-a-good-time Michael believes Mercedes is now ready for Hamilton.
This beautifully neat question speaks volumes about how one might arrive at conclusions about reported information. It is an essential question; one very often skipped over. I'll offer a simple answer to Bando's question: Not in my opinion. And here's my reasoning: I'm sure anyone would agree that simple things are easier to understand than complex things. We must acknowledge that the general public are at the mercy of those reporting (interpreting) the details. We should also bear in mind that these people are not stupid and will be conscious of the reaction their words are likely to germinate. To put it another way, it is the job of journalists to interpret what is said and then project it for the general consumption of the more ignorant â bearing in mind that it is in their own interests to generate discussion and attract readership. Now, if one reads what Ron Dennis is actually quoted as having said, it should be seen that he was actually stating some straight-forward realism; since all relationships are 'relationships': that is, they are the result of interaction between two or more parties, and any relationship evolves as an inevitable result of the interaction between them. In the personal sense, I should say Ron Dennis has never endeared himself to me. However, I am also one of his greatest admirers. He is an uncompromising perfectionist with a broad perspective on how best to achieve the long-term success of what will ultimately be his legacy. Few people have the foresight at an early enough stage in their lives to set out to achieve this. In this sense, RD is very, very exceptional*. Footnote: The mutual admiration between these two suggests to me that this relationship is not over ⦠regardless of recent events or how they have been portrayed.- - -o0o- - - *Lewis Hamilton is also very, very exceptionalâ¦
