2016 Formula 1 Gran Premio Heineken d'ItaliaFormula 1

[prisonermonkeys]

Why shelve them, there is no guarantee that a driver getting said engine is automatically going to have improved performance over the other. And with such things as set boosts and fuel flow, whatever gains are being made with each phase is probably in fractions as far as power is concerned. The best place to test is on the track, and if they only have one due to wanting to be sure before retooling or converting, then why not? It's the same argument that was made when certain drivers would claim their team mates got new aero bits to test.

What do you think would happen if Rosberg chose the upgrade and Hamilton didn't, and as a result, Rosberg started out-performing Hamilton? We already saw the backlash from fans over Mercedes reshuffling the engineers; there merest suggestion that Rosberg is getting a performance advantage would cause sections of the internet to implode.

 

[[Nor]MclarenF1]

What do you think would happen if Rosberg chose the upgrade and Hamilton didn't, and as a result, Rosberg started out-performing Hamilton? We already saw the backlash from fans over Mercedes reshuffling the engineers; there merest suggestion that Rosberg is getting a performance advantage would cause sections of the internet to implode.

I really hope we haven't reached the point where team decisions are dictated by internet fanboys...

 

[CarreraGT]

Did you miss the starts he made in the first four races of the season?

His starts in Australia and Bahrain were hardly a disaster, albeit bettered by Rosberg on both occasions (and Vettel in Australia). He started from the back of the grid in China and from 10th place in Russia, making up positions by the first corner on both occasions...

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I really hope we haven't reached the point where team decisions are dictated by internet fanboys...

I don't either - but Mercedes' response to the backlash was to defend themselves profusely and discreetly return the engineers and mechanics to their original roles.

However, I don't think that that was brought about by fanboys; rather, I think that it was exactly what Hamilton wanted. Publicly questioning the wisdom of a team decision like that was a pretty radical step, and one that would have earned the ire of the team, so I find it very hard to believe that Hamilton would have said it if there wasn't something for him.

I know that everyone thinks that I am completely compromised on the subject of Hamilton, but even if I am, a stopped clock is still right twice a day. We have seen plenty of examples of drivers manipulating the media for their own ends - remember when Red Bull gave Vettel the front wing from Webber's car in 2009? There was an enormous backlash from the fanbase, with accusations of favouritism rife. But to this day, Christian Horner maintains that Webber voluntarily gave the wing up because he wasn't happy with it, which is what allowed the team to give it to Vettel. However, at the time, this argument was drowned out amidst the storm of controversy.

The point that I am trying to make is that drivers know how to manipulate the media. Sure, Hamilton says that he doesn't need the upgrade now, but he hasn't tried it yet. What happens if Rosberg takes it and he doesn't, but Hamilton likes the gains that it offered? All he has to do is say as much in the media, and the fans and press will put pressure on the team to keep the drivers "equal".

 

[SVT Cobra GT]

I don't either - but Mercedes' response to the backlash was to defend themselves profusely and discreetly return the engineers and mechanics to their original roles.

When did that happen?

 

[Des2]

I know that everyone thinks that I am completely compromised on the subject of Hamilton, but even if I am, a stopped clock is still right twice a day. We have seen plenty of examples of drivers manipulating the media for their own ends - remember when Red Bull gave Vettel the front wing from Webber's car in 2009? There was an enormous backlash from the fanbase, with accusations of favouritism rife. But to this day, Christian Horner maintains that Webber voluntarily gave the wing up because he wasn't happy with it, which is what allowed the team to give it to Vettel. However, at the time, this argument was drowned out amidst the storm of controversy.

*2010, not 2009....
And if you read Mark Webbers book, "Aussie Grit: My Formula One Journey" you'll actually find out that, yes he did not think the new front wing was any better but did believe it was faster and did not happily give it to Seb. The team took it from him. Mark and Vettel both did not like or feel the car was majorly better with the new wing, but could see from the times that it was around 0.2-3 seconds quicker so they both wanted it.

Read on more, or research, and you'll find that Seb was always given excuses and moral boosts by the team when Mark did better; one time they said to Vettel that he did not do as well as Mark as his chassis was cracked (which was a lie and Mark used the chassis later on and did well in it too). Vettel was always given first upgrades and parts, at times Mark had new parts arrive just three hours before FP3 or quali. There is a lot of stuff you will learn from reading Mark Webber book. Horner may say he backs Mark, but the fact is you'll learn a lot about him and the team and how one sided it actually was. Sorry to Mark, Horner always had to back Seb even when he was wrong because Helmut Marko was always putting his foot in Horner's ass and if Marko didn't get his way for Seb, then Horner would pay with his job.

Lots of mistakes given in this one expert opinion of yours. The date mistake alone would knock you off a B grade to C for poor research.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The date mistake alone would knock you off a B grade to C for poor research.

And it's pretty obvious that you're looking for whatever excuse you can to dismiss my point. You have focused on one tiny little detail of the context I provided rather than the actual point that I was raising, but you haven't actually refuted anything.

Drivers manipulate the media all the time. Mark Webber did it. Nico Rosberg does it. And Lewis Hamilton has done it in the recent past. So please, tell me how my getting a date wrong invalidates the idea that Hamilton could use the media and the fanbase to put pressure on Mercedes should Rosberg get a performance advantage from an engine update. After all, he has already done it once before when Mercedes reassigned team personnel between the cars.

 

[Des2]

And it's pretty obvious that you're looking for whatever excuse you can to dismiss my point. You have focused on one tiny little detail of the context I provided rather than the actual point that I was raising, but you haven't actually refuted anything.

Drivers manipulate the media all the time. Mark Webber did it. Nico Rosberg does it. And Lewis Hamilton has done it in the recent past. So please, tell me how my getting a date wrong invalidates the idea that Hamilton could use the media and the fanbase to put pressure on Mercedes should Rosberg get a performance advantage from an engine update. After all, he has already done it once before when Mercedes reassigned team personnel between the cars.

You got the date wrong and you got the context behind the wing change all wrong too, but the wrong date was just the opening of the "wrongness" within that statement. The date does not invalid the argument you put forward, what makes it invalid is the fact you bought in a view, of Horner, which is a massive lie (about Webber happy to give the wing away) and who has always lied his butt off since. It's not wrong for him to lie, but again if you read Mark Webber book you'll understand a lot more and see a whole new side to Red Bull and the team. And you'll learn that Webber was not happy and passing that wing on easy to Vettel. It doesn't prove your point because you bought into the media which you say was pressuring the teams. But it's actually the media forcing their views into you (the fans) and then the fans getting the wrong idea and trying to force the teams to change said issue. The issue is it's not correct. You can't say "I'm right because this media says this" when new sources, and more importantly the driver in that team and the person who lost said wing, has come out and said "no I did not like that and had no options but to let Seb have it." My point is to correct you, stop others then believing what you put otherwise the media than has taken control over you and then the truth will then get lost. All I want is the truth to be said and told, not lies from people within teams to suit their own agenda.

Yes drivers manipulate the media, but when drivers or any athlete or person involved within a sport (and any sport) they actually tell the truth or what actually happened. The example you gave was poor and incorrect. So that is my issue, it's another post of you making up something or taking the media findings rather than actually finding the truth or researching further to see if what one medium says is true or if said person was actually lying. Issue is the media can play you so easily, and they take what they feel is easy for people to take out of control and before you know it the truth is lost to the back door of the internet.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

You still haven't refuted my point that drivers manipulate the media.

 

[mustafur]

You still haven't refuted my point that drivers manipulate the media.

Everyone does though.

 

[SVT Cobra GT]

You still haven't refuted my point that drivers manipulate the media.

You still haven't answered my question.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

You still haven't answered my question.

I missed it; I'm sorry. It was a race or two after Wolff publicly defended the move - I distinctly remember Sky talking about it because they went out of their way to avoid talking about it. I remember it because it was normally the sort of story that they would be all over.

 

[Des2]

You still haven't refuted my point that drivers manipulate the media.

Because your point isn't wrong and I don't disagree with what you have said, as I said before "Yes drivers manipulate the media"

The point is you gave a wrong example. You backed it up with a claim that was wrong.

So yes drivers and teams use the media to manipulate into their own way. But your evidence was wrong. Can see your point, can't see the claim being right though.

 

[Pupik]

You still haven't refuted my point that drivers manipulate the media.

With that said, the media tends to pick their favorites; nationalism, geniality, and whether you can get good copy from them also play a huge role. Of course the driver from the same nation as the publication is going to get it a bit easier, and there might be a closer relationship between that driver and a cherry-picked interviewer. And when it comes down to it, people love (or at least, want to hear from) a winner.

I recall drivers like Prost and Piquet getting accolades from the press because they always found time to speak - the former never seemed to complain to the press and the latter was usually saying or doing something silly. When it came time to deal with Senna...he was the quiet and reserved one until his later years in the sport. Mansell was the drama king, Boutsen was another one with time to spare for the press. They loved Keke Rosberg because he spoke his mind in an ever-over-professional sport, and found Reutemann too quiet and moody to approach.

I don't think that's changed much, although press access is different now; the amount of individual time they get with drivers is much less than before: more is asked of the drivers from the teams/sponsors, there are more journalists in and around the sport than ever before, and they are a bit more programmed to say just the right things. Top that off with comments that are directed to groups of journalists rather than one-on-one. Given a reporter with just a little time to interview a driver who is always "too busy" or waves them off, you can bet they'll have less-than flattering things to say about that driver.

I'm sure drivers do manipulate the press a little because they rarely trust them, or at least, they're not going to give up any secrets. They're not going to show their weaknesses to be oft-repeated. They're heavily coached at maneuvering around questions, and for some, that's the only passing they get all weekend long. Likewise, the press has to zip their lips a little bit, because they know that becoming un-endearing to Ferrari's country club, calling out McLaren's BS press releases, or god forbid...the ire of Helmut Marko might mean a lack of access to the sport-behind-the-sport, and getting booted down to the minor leagues or obscurity due to irrelevance.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

What do you think would happen if Rosberg chose the upgrade and Hamilton didn't, and as a result, Rosberg started out-performing Hamilton? We already saw the backlash from fans over Mercedes reshuffling the engineers; there merest suggestion that Rosberg is getting a performance advantage would cause sections of the internet to implode.

If he started winning it would be a quick point out to the engine, when in fact it could just be Nico performing better. Since we know the engines are based on driver preference it'd be Hamilton's fault if he made the same critique.

Fans only claimed backlash due to the stupid and yet counter-intuitive conspiracy that the team is out to get Hamilton due to lack of German ancestry. And as if some divine phoenix for 3 years and perhaps a fourth will overcome. Once again you have to stop caring about what the masses of reddit and tumblr users suggest as if it's some importance to that actual subject of F1 racing.