tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3682262344930040012.post668162289865708864..comments2024-03-28T07:18:09.958+00:00Comments on Talking about F1: The F1 blog: Looking back: Alonso's forgotten marvelGraham Keillohhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11514708469215327323noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3682262344930040012.post-49628502399154525732016-09-08T22:30:31.719+01:002016-09-08T22:30:31.719+01:00Hi Mark,
Thanks very much for getting it touch, i...Hi Mark,<br /><br />Thanks very much for getting it touch, it's very much appreciated to hear your take on this. What you say is insightful as always. <br /><br />I would like however to dispute your conclusion about my article that my ‘choice of stats is grossly misleading re the pit stop'. I state explicitly in the article that Jenson Button had pitted prior to Alonso establishing his 49 second lead over him, so at no point did I mislead on that point. Also, which again is what I state explicitly, my point was not about the number of stops made at the point of Alonso’s 49 second lead but rather that it appeared Alonso *from that point* was not planning more stops than Button as he was running so much longer before pitting (he pitted 10 laps later which suggests planning two stops to Button’s three). And this indeed is what happened as both subsequently pitted twice. <br /><br />Granted, given it was a wet-dry race Button may have made an extra stop with a switch to dry tyres in mind, but also because of this he was running with a lighter fuel load for longer (indeed he took fuel on in his final stop when he did switch to dries) and presumably Renault's ‘longer’ strategy - with it carrying greater fuel load weight with its implications on lap time - had greater flexibility of the timing of that switch to dries in mind. This would have played at last some part in Button’s superior pace to Alonso later, as well as Alonso being able to stop one time fewer. This I feel should be acknowledged.<br /><br />Remember also that the timing of Alonso's first stop was forced by the safety car appearance. And as I outlined his lead was increasing by the order of three seconds a lap at the time. I don't know how much longer Alonso was due to go in that stint (if you have this information I'd be interested to hear it) but even if it was another three laps that would have stretched his lead over Button to close to a minute.<br /><br />I would also like to dispute your estimate of a 30 second pit stop loss time. Button after emerging from his second stop that day, before which he was right behind Alonso, was 20 secs behind the Renault. Again granted this stop was rather a splash-and-dash, but Michael Schumacher pitted on the same lap and fuelled to the end and was stationary only for 2.4 secs longer than Button. That suggests an ordinary pit stop loss time in this race was more in the region of 22-23 seconds rather than 30 seconds. Indeed my general recollection of that era was even that with the additional 'nozzle time' for refuelling that 30 secs pit stop loss times almost never happened.<br /><br />So even if we park the debate about how many stops Button was planning, my two points combined suggest that rather than a likely 19 sec lead for Alonso without the safety car his lead more probably after his first stop would have been something like 37-39 seconds. Surely a decisive race-winning advantage.<br /><br />I accept however that the Honda's issue with tyre warm up was a mitigating circumstance that I should have acknowledged.<br /><br />As for my comments on your race report, yes if I had my time again writing the article I'd have included the text you outline from your report complimenting Alonso for the sake of fairness. However I do stand by my central contention that the report could have given much greater focus to Alonso’s drive, that some of the claims such as implying Button didn’t ‘let the leaders escape’ were dubious as well as that the report did not give due note (or really any note) to the extent that the safety car deployment impeded the Spaniard. Without it and the mammoth amount of time it got Button over Alonso surely subsequently debates about Button's pace in this race would have been moot, certainly as far as the win is concerned.<br /><br />Regards,<br />GrahamGraham Keillohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11514708469215327323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3682262344930040012.post-10396323682611866492016-09-08T17:40:17.965+01:002016-09-08T17:40:17.965+01:00Hi Graham,
Quote from my Autosport report: "...Hi Graham,<br /><br />Quote from my Autosport report: "A faulty wheel locking mechanism cost [Alonso] what would have been a brilliant victory."<br /><br />You ask 'Does that explain why Alonso, at the point that the safety car came out, was 49 seconds clear of Button?'<br /><br />No. That was because Fernando had not yet pitted but Button had. That cost around 30 of those 49 seconds. The remaining 19s were lost by Button's first lap not being as brilliant as Alonso's. But you must factor into that the Honda was hopeless at getting heat into its tyres and the Renault was superb at it. Also that even in the dry the Renault was WAY quicker off the line that the Honda (better weight distribution, much less peakier engine). So it took Button longer to get past the Bridgestone cars than Alonso, which is where most of the 19s went. But once they were each on a clear bit of track, there was virtually no difference in their pace. Alonso pulled out 9s on Button in a few laps at the restart because Button was repeatedly baulked for 3 laps by the lapped Massa! Once past the Ferrari Jenson was again lapping super-fast - actually up to 2s faster than Alonso for a few laps. He reduced that 9s to 5s within two laps of passing Massa. Alonso responded, upping the pace, but still Button closed him down. Button wasn't going to win it because Honda couldn't gamble on putting him onto dries as early as Renault could with Alonso (again because of the Honda's lack of warm up). It was a brilliant drive by both men, but Alonso's brilliance was on his early laps racecraft and on peak pace in the wet Button was actually faster despite a slower car. <br /><br />So in summary: 1) I gave Alonso masses of credit<br />2) Your choice of stats is grossly misleading re the pit stop<br />3) I really don't think I did get it wrong. <br /><br />Best wishes <br />Mark <br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12919990855260413164noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3682262344930040012.post-32356013845870177212016-07-21T21:22:41.131+01:002016-07-21T21:22:41.131+01:00Thanks very much for your kind words, glad you lik...Thanks very much for your kind words, glad you liked it:) Yes, like you I usually enjoy Mark Hughes' writing but I think he got it wrong reporting this race. I know he's very pro-Jenson (nothing wrong with that), but still... I suppose we can all get it wrong sometimes :)Graham Keillohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11514708469215327323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3682262344930040012.post-53883804066327390012016-07-21T09:47:31.862+01:002016-07-21T09:47:31.862+01:00I have to thank you for writing this piece. It rea...I have to thank you for writing this piece. It really is a forgotten titanic performance by one of the sport's all time greats, and you really gave it proper perspective. Also, shame on mark hughes for writing that tripe. I used to think he was one of the most analytical writers reporting in the paddock, but it seems he's just as capable of sensationalist biased reporting as anybody else.ftghbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12305905060378868270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3682262344930040012.post-60834793178677580562015-03-07T22:15:04.014+00:002015-03-07T22:15:04.014+00:00Hi. Yes, I wrote something on Nelson's Piquet&...Hi. Yes, I wrote something on Nelson's Piquet's career a couple of years ago, in which I argued that Piquet is underrated and was impacted by the Imola accident much more than we realised at the time. Here's the link if you want a read: http://www.talkingaboutf1.com/2012/11/nelson-piquet-deepest-valley-and.html<br /><br />And by the way I'm not and Englishman (I'm Scottish!)<br />Graham Keillohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11514708469215327323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3682262344930040012.post-31450778323037246082015-03-07T19:31:33.828+00:002015-03-07T19:31:33.828+00:00Please do not forget
Piquet in Hungary 1986, again...Please do not forget<br />Piquet in Hungary 1986, against Senna, <br />as a marvel to remember:<br />it is really important<br />to consider how Piquet is underrated.<br />It was the year before the Imola accident;<br />it was a few days after he said: I now clearly see<br />how the team is working, with a strong preference <br />by Patrick Head for Nigel Mansell<br />(who had become,<br />it is important to say this also,<br />a very fast driver, compared to his own previous years).<br />I know that <br />if you are an englishman<br />it is not simple to recognize that.<br />SorryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3682262344930040012.post-32279744759220298822014-07-25T16:19:54.033+01:002014-07-25T16:19:54.033+01:00Thanks for bringing back this incredible performan...Thanks for bringing back this incredible performance to your blog and for the honesty of pointing how biased journalism can be. Fantastic article!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com