Is Alonso this fast or Räikkönen that slow?

[Manoah2u]

I think it's safe to say there are various reasons why Raikkonen is 'quite a stretch away' from Alonso.

Alonso is planted well into Ferrari for a couple of years now. The team (atleast what it used to be) clearly enjoyed
working with Alonso, even if the 'ferrari dictatorship' won't 'allow' certain 'demands' from Alonso to happen.
In other words, the 'design facility' of Ferrari will build the F1 car, and that's what you'll get, that's what you'll drive,
and for the rest of the season, it's your and the mecanics problem.

Alonso is used to this environment by now, and has adapted well through years and years of F1 experience, ups and
downs, championships and just-out-of-reach.
Furthermore, Alonso is top-class F1 driver.

Raikkonen left Ferrari, ditched and dumped, and imho, if i look at interviews, specials, and whatever of Kimi at maranello, I see a man that 'doesnt give a shite' about whoever is around him. Example; Kimi crashes in Monaco, and instead of going back to the team has a drunk in his boat while the race continues. Even though that was at Mclaren, it just shows the level of commitment. I can see both the funny side but also the respectless side of that. Outcome is that there is simply less 'motivation' from the team (mechanics, etc.) towards Kimi and vise versa - something totally different to Alonso.
Kimi ain't a bad guy, he just makes it hard for himself.

Now kimi finds himself back at ferrari after enjoying his 'freedom' at Lotus/Renault, back into the Ferrari 'camp', in a F1 car that might be one of the worst Ferrari's designed ever, both aero and engine.

Like said before by other members; Kimi doesn't adapt as well as Alonso. Kimi is struggling with the car and is clearly getting frustrated. His crash when he went off-track and slammed his spinning car into massa imho is a sign of that, that was quite un-kimi like. I think his 'personal life' is interfering more aswell. He can't reach his former 'level', i'd say because he lost motivation after 1. winning the Championship (been there, done that) and his entire personal life and experience changed. So kimi back in 2007 is not the kimi we see now.

In the meanwhile, Alonso maintains his calm, is still after his 3rd World Championship, has the patience, and seems not 'effected' by circumstances as much as kimi does.

That being said, i do not believe however Kimi is as good as Alonso in an average car. Kimi is seriously fast, but it must be said yes, when the environment isn't that good, he can't reach his level, whilst Alonso seems to be able to cope with any environment.
I'd even go as far as to say Kimi is faster then Alonso, when in a perfect environment (unfortunately for Kimi, a perfect environment is rare so he'll miss out to Alonso). If I look at Kimi at Spa, overtaking balls-out in the most impossible places,
I see a man with incredible courage, speed and confidence.

Alonso however keeps his calm and is far more 'tactical', and can overtake in perhaps less 'bold' manouvres, but technically more correct moves where he'll be able to put his car in a way the other driver can no longer hold his position.

Long story short: Alonso is better in less then perfect circumstances, Kimi is amazing in perfect circumstances.
And let's face it; Alonso has 2 driver titles versus 1 of Kimi. So statistically, its a battle won always by Alonso.
BTW, If Hamilton didn't have tech issues, or if the the stewards actually penalised BMW and Williams for the fuel
' irregularities ', Kimi never would have won that championship.

Next year probably will be a fairer battle between the two, if Alonso will remain at Ferrari (which i'd doubt seriously,
and I think Ferrari signed Kimi because they knew, know, or plan to ditch Alonso anyway, and must have a WDC in one
of the cars).

[Andres125sx]

So this has been bothering me all season now. Why does everyone think that Alonso is so adaptable, particularly now that Raikkonen has come into the team and been soundly beaten?
Has everybody completely overlooked the fact that the development of this Ferrari has been driven for several years in precisely the direction that Alonso wanted?

That´s true.... but you should also consider the opposite. When Alonso signed in for Ferrari, Ferrari had been developing the car for Kimi´s driving style for several seassons, and Alonso won his ver first race with Ferrari.

That is a rather bad example. The Ferrari was very good and Alonso and Massa were never closer to each others pace as in the beginning of 2010. It took 7 races until Alonso really got the hand over Massa, who just came back from his accident. So from this example I would rather say the development theory is good, but this is hard to judge.

What?

Malaysia, third GP of the seasson, that was the only race when Massa was in front of the WDC, and that was due to Alonso´s car problems on that track (clutch or gearbox, can´t remind exaclty) both on qualifying and race. Before and after that race, Alonso has always outscored Massa. And that was with Alonso driving his very first races with Ferrari while Massa was on his 6th seasson with Ferrari.

Obvioulsy this is hard to judge, but you can´t say the adaptability theory is false because the car has been developed for Alonso, and ignore when it was the opposite and it had been developed for Kimi, Alonso didn´t suffer any problem and performed at a very good level. That´s exactly what adaptability means, one suffers with a car wich is not developed for his driving style, while the other performes fine even when the car is not developed for his driving style

[condor]

Alonso on the other hand can do anything with a car. He feels and adapts to the car's behaviour. Hamilton is similar.

How do you base that opinion? I get the "Alonso can do anything". That is based on the good results Alonso had in every car for the last 10 years.
But Hamilton? You mean the guy who could not drive the 2011 McL at all or the guy who under performed due to a brake manufacturer he was not used to?

Did you watch the 2011 season or just looked at the points at the end? Because his problem that year was not lack of speed. He was still consistently quicker than Jenson but his problem was he just kept crashing into other drivers. As for the "under performed due to a brake manufacturer he was not used to?" - I gather you are referring to last season with Mercedes. I would hardly call it underperformance considering he still beat his team mate who had been with the team for several years.

To be honest it's not even really up for debate as it's quite clear that both Alonso and Hamilton are standout at being able to extract pace out of any car, even if it doesn't suit them.

[PlatinumZealot]

Come on, we know Button's pace. Ham is capable of destroying Button in Q. Except for his occasional superior drives (when everything fits and he got his tires working like in China) Ham was mostly behind Button in mid and second half 2011 in Q and race pace.

I will not bother to go down the Hamilton Button rabbit hole. What i am saying to you is, that even if you think hamilton was soundly beaten in 2011 you nor anyone can never say as a fact that he had problems with cars handling. Never heard him complain about handling when he was regularly out qualifying Button and winning races. That does not fit your argument that HAM had an issue adapting to the car the way kimi is now- rubbish if you ask me so just let it go, man.

[Gaz.]

Why oh why does almost every thread end up talking about Lewis Bloody Hamilton! Check the thread title- Alonso & Raikkonen. Jesus give it a rest.

[xpensive]

Why oh why does almost every thread end up talking about Lewis Bloody Hamilton! Check the thread title- Alonso & Raikkonen. Jesus give it a rest.

Indeed.

[PlatinumZealot]

Why oh why does almost every thread end up talking about Lewis Bloody Hamilton! Check the thread title- Alonso & Raikkonen. Jesus give it a rest.

Indeed.

Next thing you know the thread quickly descends into Alonso vs Hamilton 2007, then finally implodes on itself into Nazis.

[Miguel]

Why oh why does almost every thread end up talking about Lewis Bloody Hamilton! Check the thread title- Alonso & Raikkonen. Jesus give it a rest.

Indeed.

Next thing you know the thread quickly descends into Alonso vs Hamilton 2007, then finally implodes on itself into Nazis.

Didn't the Max Mosley dungeon scandal also happen in 2007? Ah, no, 2008. Thankfully MrM hasn't used his "Right to Forget" card.

[SectorOne]

Before and after that race, Alonso has always outscored Massa.

Sometimes with team orders and with general bad strategy for Massa it should be said.

[Kingshark]

That is a rather bad example. The Ferrari was very good and Alonso and Massa were never closer to each others pace as in the beginning of 2010. It took 7 races until Alonso really got the hand over Massa, who just came back from his accident. So from this example I would rather say the development theory is good, but this is hard to judge.

Wait what? The first 5 races of 2010;

Bahrain: Massa better in qualifying, but Alonso passes him around the outside at Turn 1. He goes on to finish 16 seconds ahead of Massa.
Australia: Alonso out-qualifies Massa by 0.726 seconds, but spins in Turn 1. At the end of the SC on lap 4, Alonso is last and Massa is 2nd. Alonso catches Massa by the time they reach little over half race.
Malaysia: The only time they were equal on pace in the first 5 races of the season, and Alonso was driving the whole race with a damaged clutch.
China: Alonso has a drive through penalty which puts him about 20 seconds behind Massa. Fernando catches him in about 15 laps and overtakes him just before the pitlane entrance. Fernando ends up finishing 46 seconds ahead.
Spain: Alonso out-qualifies Massa by 0.650 seconds, and out-races him by 41 seconds.

Alonso was leagues ahead of Massa on raw pace right from the get-go, despite having little supposed say in the car's development.

[Stradivarius]

That is a rather bad example. The Ferrari was very good and Alonso and Massa were never closer to each others pace as in the beginning of 2010. It took 7 races until Alonso really got the hand over Massa, who just came back from his accident. So from this example I would rather say the development theory is good, but this is hard to judge.

Wait what? The first 5 races of 2010;

Bahrain: Massa better in qualifying, but Alonso passes him around the outside at Turn 1. He goes on to finish 16 seconds ahead of Massa.
Australia: Alonso out-qualifies Massa by 0.726 seconds, but spins in Turn 1. At the end of the SC on lap 4, Alonso is last and Massa is 2nd. Alonso catches Massa by the time they reach little over half race.
Malaysia: The only time they were equal on pace in the first 5 races of the season, and Alonso was driving the whole race with a damaged clutch.
China: Alonso has a drive through penalty which puts him about 20 seconds behind Massa. Fernando catches him in about 15 laps and overtakes him just before the pitlane entrance. Fernando ends up finishing 46 seconds ahead.
Spain: Alonso out-qualifies Massa by 0.650 seconds, and out-races him by 41 seconds.

Alonso was leagues ahead of Massa on raw pace right from the get-go, despite having little supposed say in the car's development.

The fact still remains that after Germany in 2010, Massa had 85 points, while Alonso had 123. This was after Alonso was handed victory in the race, which means the driver performance wise it was 116 points to Alonso and 92 points to Massa. Are you claiming that this difference didn't grow later in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013?

Before you answer, let me present some simple numbers:

Code: Select all

Season      Alonso    Massa    Ratio
2010 (1/2)   116        92      1.26
2010 (2/2)   129        59      2.18
 2010        252       144      1.75
 2011        257       118      2.18
 2012        278       122      2.28
 2013        242       112      2.16

The ratio here is simply Alonso's points divided by Massa's points. This ratio seems to be roughly around 2.2, but not at the beginning of 2010. Then it was much closer to 1, although Alonso was already better. I think the team order may have had a strong psychological effect on Massa. After being denied the victory in Germany, his performance dropped significantly. But that isn't really the point here. The point is that the results supports the theory that there was some kind of adapting/development going on which gave Alonso a greater advantage after a while. There could be other explainations, but the results definitely support such an interpretation.

[FW17]

You can blame ferrari for 2010

but 2012 was Alonso's fault. Car was bad but good luck was on his side and he had a huge lead. He tanked in 2 crucial qualifying in the end of the season, Japan was a bad session had to take a risk at the start which ended the race. USGP was another bad qualifying from where he never recovered.

[Kingshark]

You can blame ferrari for 2010

but 2012 was Alonso's fault. Car was bad but good luck was on his side and he had a huge lead. He tanked in 2 crucial qualifying in the end of the season, Japan was a bad session had to take a risk at the start which ended the race. USGP was another bad qualifying from where he never recovered.

Sorry mate, but you have it all backwards.

1. The F10 was a better car relative to the competition than the F2012.
In 2010 Ferrari had on balance the 2nd best car throughout the season. Inferior to RBR, but slightly better than McLaren.
In 2012, Ferrari had the 3rd or even 4th best car. Inferior to RBR and McLaren, equal with Lotus.
Ferrari genuinely had a mighty car in Bahrain, Germany, and Monza 2010. Did they have the best car at any point in 2012?

2. Alonso was more consistent in 2012 than he was in 2010.
In 2010, Alonso had poor weekend performances in Turkey and Belgium. Likewise, he made a fair share of mistakes. He had a 50/50 incident with Button in Australia, jumped the start in China, crashed in FP3 in Monaco, got a penalty in Silverstone, and crashed in Belgium.
In 2012, the only weekend where Alonso looked slower than Massa in both Q and R was USA. Likewise, apart from a spin in Australia Q2, and the crash in Suzuka, he made no mistakes all season and consistently got the maximum out of the car.

Alonso has to take more blame for 2010 than he does for 2012. In fact, I'd say that for 2012 he is almost blameless.

[Kingshark]

The fact still remains that after Germany in 2010, Massa had 85 points, while Alonso had 123. This was after Alonso was handed victory in the race, which means the driver performance wise it was 116 points to Alonso and 92 points to Massa. Are you claiming that this difference didn't grow later in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013?

Before you answer, let me present some simple numbers:

Code: Select all

Season      Alonso    Massa    Ratio
2010 (1/2)   116        92      1.26
2010 (2/2)   129        59      2.18
 2010        252       144      1.75
 2011        257       118      2.18
 2012        278       122      2.28
 2013        242       112      2.16

The ratio here is simply Alonso's points divided by Massa's points. This ratio seems to be roughly around 2.2, but not at the beginning of 2010. Then it was much closer to 1, although Alonso was already better. I think the team order may have had a strong psychological effect on Massa. After being denied the victory in Germany, his performance dropped significantly. But that isn't really the point here. The point is that the results supports the theory that there was some kind of adapting/development going on which gave Alonso a greater advantage after a while. There could be other explainations, but the results definitely support such an interpretation.

I never denied that Alonso's points advantage over Massa was greater in 2011-2013 than it was in 2010. But was this because Alonso lacked pace in 2010, or because he was inconsistent in the first half of the season?

basti313 claimed that it took Alonso 7 races to gain any kind of upper hand on Massa. This is simply not true, Alonso was significantly quicker than Massa right from the get go in 2010, despite the car not being build around him that year. That is some frighting adaptability right there.

Your points arguments is not representative, because point tallies are often not representative. When you look at 2012, you'd think that Button performed almost (if not just) as well as Hamilton. Well, anyone who actually watched that season will tell you the complete opposite.

The real difference to why Alonso's points advantage over Massa in 2010 was not as big as it was in the 3 successive years was because of his abnormal amount of mistakes that year.

Alonso's mistakes in 2010:
Incident with Button in Australia (50/50)
Jump start in China
Crash in Monaco FP3
Penalty in Silverstone
Crash in Belgium

Alonso's mistakes from 2011 to 2013:
Crash into Hamilton in Malaysia '11
50/50 incident with Button in Canada '11
Spin in Australia qualifying '12
Crash in Suzuka '12
Front wing in Malaysia '13

Alonso's mistakes in 2010 alone equal his number of mistakes in the next three years. This is why Alonso wasn't dominating Massa as much in 2010, it has nothing to do with raw pace or adaptability, but consistency.

[FW17]

You can blame ferrari for 2010

but 2012 was Alonso's fault. Car was bad but good luck was on his side and he had a huge lead. He tanked in 2 crucial qualifying in the end of the season, Japan was a bad session had to take a risk at the start which ended the race. USGP was another bad qualifying from where he never recovered.

Sorry mate, but you have it all backwards.

1. The F10 was a better car relative to the competition than the F2012.
In 2010 Ferrari had on balance the 2nd best car throughout the season. Inferior to RBR, but slightly better than McLaren.
In 2012, Ferrari had the 3rd or even 4th best car. Inferior to RBR and McLaren, equal with Lotus.
Ferrari genuinely had a mighty car in Bahrain, Germany, and Monza 2010. Did they have the best car at any point in 2012?

2. Alonso was more consistent in 2012 than he was in 2010.
In 2010, Alonso had poor weekend performances in Turkey and Belgium. Likewise, he made a fair share of mistakes. He had a 50/50 incident with Button in Australia, jumped the start in China, crashed in FP3 in Monaco, got a penalty in Silverstone, and crashed in Belgium.
In 2012, the only weekend where Alonso looked slower than Massa in both Q and R was USA. Likewise, apart from a spin in Australia Q2, and the crash in Suzuka, he made no mistakes all season and consistently got the maximum out of the car.

Alonso has to take more blame for 2010 than he does for 2012. In fact, I'd say that for 2012 he is almost blameless.

Alonso had mistakes in 2010, but what counts is at what point in the season these mistakes were made. Early in the season mid season is always alright it can always be made up at the end.

What mattered was the level of performance in the last 3 - 4 races if you have a chance of winning the championship where either Ferrari or Alonso cracked. Kimi in 2007, Vettel in 2010 and 2012 are the examples which I am quoting for tanked.