Keeping Petrov “not an easy decision” – Boullier

F1 Fanatic round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In today’s round-up: Eric Boullier says he’d have “no excuses” if Vitaly Petrov “failed for a second year.”

Links

Top F1 links from the past 24 hours:

Renault chief admits retaining Vitaly Petrov was a gamble (The Independent)

“It was not an easy decision because I would have had no excuses if he had failed for a second year.”

Full Onboard Camera Lap of Bathurst with Jenson Button (YouTube)

HRT to take wing at Sepang – Karthikeyan (Reuters)

“‘If we get the new front wing,’ he added, before correcting himself. ‘Not if, we are going to get it. We are reasonably confident that we will qualify and if all these things happen then we don’t have any excuse not to qualify for Malaysia.'”

Spain’s Automobile Federation criticises HRT attitude (GP Update)

Spanish Automobile President Carlos Gracia: “I want a serious and consistent Spanish team with the necessary budgets. We do not want a team which makes a fool of itself.”

Lewis Hamilton floor damage

Adam Cooper via Twitter

“Something you might not have seen up close: Lewis Hamilton’s damaged McLaren floor in parc ferme.”

Via the F1 Fanatic live Twitter app

Glock worried about Virgin’s form (Autosport)

“The balance of the car is not that bad. Simply, we just have not enough downforce, and the people in the team have to realise that.”

Formula1Game on Twitter

“The pit-lane system is getting a complete overhaul for F1 2011.”

Via the F1 Fanatic live Twitter app

Super Visor – Formula One helmets become even safer (Formula 1)

“A mere 1,200 gram carbon-fibre shell that can withstand the crushing force of a 55-tonne tank without deforming, and an 800C fire for 30 seconds without its interior rising above 70 degrees Celsius.”

Karun Chandhok on Twitter

“Super day on track at the JPSI Sports City – proud to be the first person to do laps on the new asphalt! Took the site engineers around. The layout is a lot faster than I thought and the wider overtaking special entries into turns three, four and 16 are going will work superbly.”

Via the F1 Fanatic live Twitter app

Note from Japan Automobile Federation to FIA members (FIA)

“On behalf of the Japan Automobile Federation I would like to thank the FIA members around the world for their kind expressions of sympathy and concern of late.”

Follow F1 news as it breaks using the F1 Fanatic live Twitter app.

Comment of the day

In defence of Lewis Hamilton, by ads:

I make no bones about it, I am a “Hamilton fan boy”, but probably only because I judge him off primary sources and talent, rather than jealousy and warped secondary views. Yes, he does have a habit of talking without thinking, but only because when you strip what he says right down, what he has ‘actually’ said is innocent and honest.

It’s like the whole Red Bull soft drinks company thing again – Lewis wasn’t being derogatory (as many haters gleefully interpreted), he simply said that as they were not a pedigree manufacturer, he did not know what their long term plans in the sport were, and that whilst they were in the sport he believed that the proven might of McLaren and Ferrari would be able to react to their current domination.

People need to read what he actually says, rather than what they want him to say
ads

From the forum

What other races could we cover on F1 Fanatic Live in 2011?

Site updates

Thanks to everyone who gave feedback on the problem with the site not loading properly. On inspection the problem appeared to be limited to some Google Chrome and Apple Safari users outside the UK.

Some changes were made to the code yesterday and early feedback from users who were experiencing the problem is it’s now gone away. If you noticed the problem before, please let me know if it now appears to be better. You may find it goes away if you manually refresh the page.

Happy birthday!

No F1 Fanatic birthdays today. If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Damon Hill triumphed in the Brazilian Grand Prix on this day 15 years ago.

Here’s Rubens Barrichello getting a little over-excited after trying to pass Michael Schumacher:

Images © Renault/LAT, Adam Cooper via Twitter

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

128 comments on “Keeping Petrov “not an easy decision” – Boullier”

  1. Hmm…I think I’m seeing the wrong YouTube video, because the one I’m seeing is the South African GP from 1974, when I think Rubens would have been about two years old? ;-)

    1. jsw11984 (@jarred-walmsley)
      31st March 2011, 0:18

      I’ve got the same issue, I think the code mustn’t have been changed from yesterday

    2. And I thought it was just fine .. considering how long Schumacher and Barrichello are in F1 …. ok, I admit it, this joke is lame.

      1. Going to that link was a bad decision, now I’m watching more and more videos and I just can’t stop. F1 is just wonderful …

      2. I didn’t even remember Rubens actally raced for Jordan as well.

    3. Does it matter if Rubens has been racing for 19 or 190 years or if he started racing at the age of 2 or 20? He has been there for ever and will never be a world champion. :-)

    4. Prisoner Monkeys
      31st March 2011, 3:13

      I think Rubens would have been about two years old?

      How else do you think he got 300+ Grands Prix starts if he wasn’t racing as an infant?

    5. Yep I see that SA GP 1974 as well, seems Keith has the wrong link in there.

    6. Sorry about that – got the right video in there now.

  2. “Renault chief admits retaining Vitaly Petrov was a gamble (The Independent)”

    It still is a gamble. Yes he’s been good in the last two races but let’s not go overboard here. Not bad for a number two driver though as he says ;)

    1. That onboard lap from Button is pretty awesome by the way.

    2. He’s already scored over half his points tally from all of last year though, so a good start haha let’s hope he keeps it up

      1. I hadn’t really done the math on that yet. That’s pretty impressive. Hopefully he can get a few more podiums this year!

    3. It’d be nice to see Petrov get consistent. He had some nice starts so far, did fine in Spa in the race, had a good weekend in Hungary beating his teammate, performed well in Abu Dhabi and now showed good work in Melbourne. So thats 3,5 good showings so far. Hope he can keep the results coming to earn himself a solid place in F1 for the next years. (I’m sure Bernie and Putin would like that once Sotchi comes along.)

      1. Prisoner Monkeys
        31st March 2011, 3:24

        So thats 3,5 good showings so far.

        4.5 – he held Alonso at bay for 30 laps in Turkey last year until Alonso made contact with him and gave him a puncture in the lasp few laps of the race. He was forced to pit and fell out of the points, but picked up the fastest lap of the race.

        1. He was also pretty impressive at Shanghai, especially considering it was only his 4th GP, so that makes 5.5. Although I wasn’t that impressed with him at Spa so I’d take the half point away to leave him with 5

          1. Not impressed with him at Spa? He recovered well from qualifying and put in a cracker of a pass on Rosberg.

            I forgot his battle with Hamilton. That was very fun to watch!

      2. Don’t forget his great duel with Hamilton in Sepang!

    1. What… the…?

    2. Hahaha – not bad, but my C3P0 would be Martin Whitmarsh and Chewbacca has to be Richard Branson. Alonso in Vader’s helmet really made me crack up (not because I think he’s evil!). The Hamilton and Button one is genius. And of course bernie was too easy : )

      1. Why is the Darth Alonso pic actually look natural? =/

      2. Agree with you on these two, and I would prefer Charlie Whiting as Yoda.

    3. Wow, I innocently compared yesterday Alonso to Vader and look what I got back ;)

    4. I nearly wet myself when I saw “Anakin”

    5. Sebastian Vettel as Luke Skywalker

      Why’d you need to shoop that? Take Petrov, he already looks like Luke Skywalker.

    6. That’s brilliant!

  3. Spot on ads. I actually read the full interview from Lewis too and it’s clear that people have just read the quotation and nothing else.

    1. i read the whole thing. twice. Didnt change my opinion.

    2. Agree, I felt it was pretty normal and uncontroversial what he actually said.

      It was more about reasoning why he might hesitate to look at them after 2012 for lack of knowing their long term plans, than any quip about them not being serious.

  4. i couldn’t tell it was button without all the whining.

    watch the video while pinching your nose:
    “i’ve got nooooo grip”
    “what happened to my tires?”
    “i’ve got nooooo grip”
    “my tires are gone”
    “how’s he so much faster than me?”

    1. Actually, You may not have had the volume high enough to hear it. Try again, I’m sure you’ll hear it. ;)

  5. Williams F1!
    31st March 2011, 0:49

    Site is loading much better Keith.
    Before it was behaving rather strangely, loading many many things before displaying and sometimes not coming up.

    So far, so good!

    1. Yep. It’s working fine for me now on all my browsers across all platforms. Thanks Keith!

      1. it’s often an ad that causes that kind of thing. opera in particular can hang on an ad or cookie.

        1. Yep, I noticed that as well. I went to the mobile version, which for safari was a good workaround. And when Chrome wouldn’t listen to my frantic F5-pressing, I went to IE 8…
          But most of the time nowadays, I use my phone. Have work to do on my PC during the day, so in the evenings I check all the news and comments.
          And it seems a lot better now!

  6. Onboard footage, good. Conrod straight alone was worth it.

    I’m surprised how much extra time there could be in the track though. Obviously I wasn’t expecting Button to go as deep as possible into the corners and scrape every barrier, given it’s an exhibition.

    Is the sound at Forrest’s elbow the car bottoming out? I haven’t heard it sound like that before, although this car was raised so maybe it sounds different because of that.

    1. That’s a great video, track, sky, helicopter… Almost too good to be true – am I the only who thought watching it that it’s been taken from latest Colin McRae Rally or F1 2011?

    2. I agree, those twists and turns were pretty scary to watch, it must have felt amazing in an F1 car, even if he wasn’t pushing it.

      My experiences on the Bathurst track are mainly with the PS1 game TOCA world touring cars. Anyone remember that? It was always without fail completely stormy and chaotic :P and Jenson’s lap makes the track hard to recognise in a way because everything happens so much faster.

    3. Fantastic onboard video. The sound alone is great, and unlike a lot of TV feeds for F1, you really get a sense of the acceleration – the scenery just seems to appear.

      Whether that’s down to the narrow track, or the camera angle, FOM’s TV crew could take a few notes here.

  7. I am well impressed by that lap of Bathhurst. I realise that its unlikely, or even impossible to have an F1 race there but it looks like a fantastic place.

    Wouldn’t it be cool to have it as a bonus track for the F1 2011 game. And speaking of which, for anyone who remembers the F1 World Grand Prix for the N64, does it remind you, just slightly, of the volcano bonus track you got when you completed the challenge mode or is it just me??

    1. This is one thing the game needs to implement. Bonus tracks. I heard though that FOM/FIA didnt authorize such things in the previous iterations. A pity to be sure.

      1. Prisoner Monkeys
        31st March 2011, 3:12

        They didn’t object to it in F1 2005. You could unlock Detroit and (I think) Paul Ricard, but you could only use them in time trials.

        Ah, but for the days of Colin McRae Rally 2.0 where just showing up to an event was enough to unlock a new car …

        1. Well that just shows how rubbish I was at F1 2005. I never got either of those! My attention span was far too short anyway. It’s not improved much.

          But seriously though, couldn’t they just create “new” tracks. They could start from scratch and create one which isn’t bound by FIA rules.

          Now I don’t mean one with “loop the loops” or “rings of fire” or such things. Just one that doesn’t resemble the so called “Tilke-drome” we’ve all come to know so well.

  8. Must….Not….Comment….On….CoTD…. O.o

    1. Why not? Have a go, come on, you can do it without being overly rude ;-)

    2. I must not… but I have to.

      I judge him off primary sources and talent

      Me too, always thought of him as a very fast racer, deserving to have a seat in a top team. That doesn’t mean I have to like him. I just don’t, taking his whole personality into account. Live with that.

      he does have a habit of talking without thinking

      You call it a habit, I call it otherwise.

      (as many haters gleefully interpreted)

      Can we please stop using the H* word? I can’t understand how one can hate an F1 driver (apart from some very especial circumstances). If I’m being oversensitive about it (as English is not my mother tongue), please tell write me.

      Ok, stop. Not going to comment on the “pedigree manufacturers” thread.

  9. I have two questions:

    1. Has anyone explained why Hamilton wasn’t disqualified for a worn plank?

    2. Why Vettel and Buemi weren’t given penalties for “going outside track limits” to make a pass stick just like Button was?

    Haven’t heard much chat about these and they could have changed the podium completely.

    1. I read this on Adam Cooper’s Twitter, regarding the off-track overtaking.

    2. 1. Probably because it wasn’t overly worn out

      2. Apparently it’s fine at that corner… don’t see why though, its still off the track. if it’s fine to use that line at that corner, just extend the track limits

    3. Well I can compare Hamilton’s plank to a chocolate wafer. If you peel off one layer or two, that is wear and can add to performance as the frontal area is reduce. But if instead you take a bite out of it, that is damage as the frontal area still remains the same and the jagged edge is more likely to give you drag. In all, an unevenwear pattern will not likely attract any attention unlike a uniform wear pattern.

      1. Exactly. The damage to his plank was not indicative of illegal ride height that would’ve given a performance advantage, it was a direct result of some damage that caused the tea tray to become detached at the front.

      2. Nice comparison. I gather it was exaclty like that.

        Clear damage, only if it happens again, the stewards will have a look at how McLaren did the splitter support.

    4. Prisoner Monkeys
      31st March 2011, 3:09

      1. Has anyone explained why Hamilton wasn’t disqualified for a worn plank?

      Either a) the plank wasn’t worn at all, or b) if it was worn, the stewards accepted McLaren’s explanation that the wear was due to damage and not because of an illegal ride height.

      2. Why Vettel and Buemi weren’t given penalties for “going outside track limits” to make a pass stick just like Button was?

      Cars are allowed to go outside the boundaries of the circuit if doing so lengthens the distance they travel. When Vettel and Buemi did it, they went around the outside at turn four, which mean they had to travel further than when Button went down the inside to turn twelve.

      1. I’m not sure the overtaking explanation holds up – at Spa Mansell warned the drivers that if they went wide at turn 1 and gained position they would be penalised. I don’t think it should vary for different corners.

        1. At Spa you can achieve a faster exit from La Source by going over the white line, without compromising your line into Eau Rouge. So it’s a net gain of time/speed.

          Going wide at Turn 4 at Albert Park puts you in completely the wrong position for Turn 5, meaning a net loss.

          1. But once you are in front of someone because you left the track they have to work to get past you again. Otherwise Vettel would have immediately lost his place.

      2. Cars are allowed to go outside the boundaries of the circuit if doing so lengthens the distance they travel. When Vettel and Buemi did it, they went around the outside at turn four, which mean they had to travel further than when Button went down the inside to turn twelve.

        Whether or not fans agree with it, I would imagine that’s exactly why the stewards took no notice of those particular overtakes.

        1. It’s an illogical argument, apart from breaking a rule.

          If you left the track, that would mean you had too much speed to stay on it (unless you visibly lose control momentarily, in which case the fault is not yours). So going off it means you get a speed advantage.

          I’m not saying Vettel should be punished, because retrospective punishments for doing something you wouldn’t have done, had you known the clarification, is nonsense (oh look, Spa 08 again). But this should have been stamped down on ages ago.

          1. No you don’t get a speed advantage. The line the drivers take is a compromise between speed, distance traveled and entry position to the next corner.
            For instance you see a lot of drivers loose position because they out break themselves. Giving them a momentarily speed advantage, but they still need to get around the corners, and if the driver behind holds his line he will pass. Because it is the quicker way around the track.

          2. But in the scenario you describe, they lose speed because they have to slow down to get back on line, not because they are going an extra distance. In the Vettel scenario from Sunday, he didn’t have to. If he did, he would have left himself open to counter-attack from Button. This is what I mean by an advantage, he avoided having to slow down.

          3. @mads

            Firstly, Vettel didn’t outbrake himself, he drove the faster line by leaving the confines of the track, hence he overtook Button.

            Secondly, are you saying that Button was overtaken because he took the faster line through the corner? Can’t you see how illogical that argument sounds?

          4. @Icthyes
            Yes they loose speed because they have to get back in line, but the same goes for turn 4. You still have to make the next corner. So by going wide you are not only going to travel a longer distance, but he also compromises his run into turn 5.
            @Rob
            Yes i am saying that basically. Button has a slower car and were on older tyres. Massivly slower then Vettel on fest tyres, so the disadvantage Vettel had by going off the track was outweighed because Button had to go a lot slower through the corner because of his tyres.

      3. What annoys me is the FIA haven’t said a thing on the plank subject. DC was DQ’d for the same thing (exactly the same thing), so how could some one else get away with it?

        It seems as if they are trying to make us all forget about it, by simply not commenting on it. They know our memory only lasts until the next race :P

        I’m sure Bernie had his way with them. Giving Lewis a DQ would not have been good for the show.

        1. Really? Have you examined the 2 planks in question? Or do you think they might have worn differently? In fact has anyone shown that the thing was worn past legal limits at all?

          Or do you need a detailed explanation of every scrutineers result for every car?

          It didn’t get a a mention because it didn’t break the rules…

      4. Not b)
        Is doesn’t matter if the plank is worn due to damage or not, explanation or accidental damage doesn’t come into it, if the car is illegal its illegal but it wasn’t on any of the 8 measuring points so it is as simple as that.
        If explanation were accepted then Sauber should get their points back for their manufacturing problem, which of course they shouldn’t.

        Re overtaking that is more controversial, it no good mentioning Mansell or anyone in the past because prior to this season they have said (if you believe the BBC) no racing beyond the designated limits of the track will be allowed. Judging by the weekend the BBC or steward have obviously got that wrong. The overside of the track is often almost as much of an advantage the outside on sum corner. Watch how much Button slowed down to take the corner compared with Vettel. Massive advantage was taken, however I not sure if any action should of been taken.

        1. or even…

          The outside of the track is often almost as much of an advantage the inside on some corners. Watch how much Button slowed down to take the corner (within the track limits) compared with Vettel. Massive advantage was taken, however I not sure if any action should of been taken. It again shows Vettel can’t overtake though, even in a much quicker car.

      5. That’s not what it says in the regulations.

        The regulations state that gaining an advantage by leaving the track is not allowed.

        20.3 Drivers must use the track at all times. For the avoidance of doubt the white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not.

        A driver will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with the track.

        Should a car leave the track for any reason the driver may rejoin. However, this may only be done when it is safe to do so and without gaining any advantage

        1. Come on FIA. Let’s have one set of rules and stick to them please then.

          I’m really tired of all this. It really has gone on too long.

  10. Way to go EB… be positive dude! :)

  11. breaking news! Williams re-hire Rosberg for secret F1 test-
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXTT2Mxe3sA&feature=related

    1. What on earth am I looking at?

    2. Haha! That’s great stuff. 7 gears to get up to coasting speed on a bicycle maybe? Nicely done.

  12. Very encouraging words for HRT from the Spanish Automobile Federation. He doesns’t ask why no spanish company sponsors the team.

    Glock is worried? Well he should just walk up to Wirth and tell him to stop being a dreamer.
    F1 is a battle ground and you arm your army with the best tools available. You wont give your airforce solar powered planes or your soldiers bio degradable clubs and spears.
    The enemy will do some unspeakable things to you and you may not live to even dislike it.

    CFD is the future and is great but that future is many 10, 20 or 30 years away, but if you want your drivers to have a fair chance, you need to compete at the same level as your opponents.
    But then again, if you don’t know what you are looking for, CFD or wind tunnel won’t make ay difference.

    1. Well it would sure be nice if he could provide any assistance instead of putting out demands, but on the other hand, he can’t persuade spanish companies to sponsor HRT either.

      Considering the attitude, I don’t really see the issue. What should Kolles have said?
      That he is deeply disappointed with himself and the teams work and he feels miserable for the situation and hopes that everyone in the team feels at least as bad as he does. The engineers are pathetic and the mechanics are useless for taking that long to assemble the cars. Also everyone in the team should stand in the corner for the next two weeks and think about what they have done. Would that help?
      Or does it help if he appears optimistic and tries to look forward and has some encouraging words for the guys who worked for probably very little money very hard to get the cars running at all.

      I really don’t think HRT did particularly well, but the only thing that helps NOW (2 months ago they could have made a big difference but now is too late for that) is to motivate the team to push through this and hope that the few novelties work out well.

      I hope for them, that their new parts work and they get to work on a setup a little. Virgin didn’t look out of reach with their 3,707.78km of testing and 3 FPs compared to 32km in Melbourne for the HRT. Still undecided if that argument is in favour of HRT or against Virgin. I fear its the latter.

      1. What’s particularly worrisome for both of those teams is that the top teams are going to continue developing at a staggering rate, so just to stay within 107%, they’re going to have to get better and better at each race.

    2. But then again, if you don’t know what you are looking for, CFD or wind tunnel won’t make ay difference.

      True. I’d be willing to bet the top teams are getting more out of their minimal amount of CFD use as Virgin is out of devoting its entire aero allotment to CFD. That said I’m sure Wirth is not a fool, but so far it would seem he’s made some questionable choices. I wondered what they were getting at with that incredibly low nose at launch this winter, when everyone else’s noses were getting higher and higher. The only other car with a low nose is the HRT, and that’s not company I’d want to be in. I hope for his sake Glock doesn’t stay there again next year and keep wasting the best years of his career at a team that can’t compete. He’s a great driver, who I think could be right in there with the right car. Hopefully they can close the gap a bit this year.

      1. Oh The other hand.. Virgin are going to make a kick ass PS3 game ;)

        1. that’s actually a really good way to claw back some of that capital investment..

      2. I think Glock is hinting at maybe getting a windtunnel in.

        But the real thing missing here is a Newey, Willis, Gascoyne, Byrne, … bringing in some fresh design concept, thinking out of the box and then put it into the CFD to perfect it. Seems Wirth himself isn’t, at least not in F1.

        The computer will hardly come up with new Ideas, even if perfected it will just help them get ideas tested virtually and then build the parts to put it on track.

  13. Prisoner Monkeys
    31st March 2011, 3:05

    Don’t quote me on this, but I think we might be getting some Lotus vs. Lotus news today. Early estimates suggest that the hearing could last for ten days, which is today, March 31st. Or it could be tomorrow; it depends on whether you count March 21st – which was set aside as a reading day for the judge – as an actual day of the hearing.

    However, it’s unlikely the judge will actually make a decision one way or the other today. Not unless he feels the case is so clear-cut that he can decide on the spot (and given the complexity of the case, that’s unlikely). I’ve heard a final verdict could be anywhere between four and six weeks away – so expect headway before the Turkish Grand Prix – and that’s before appeals and damages cases. Though I think that if the judge rules one way, the teams will have to abide by it until the appeal is over, in which case they may revery to their original pattern of activity if they win.

    “It was not an easy decision because I would have had no excuses if he had failed for a second year.”

    I think it’s well and truly paid off, Erc.

    “I want a serious and consistent Spanish team with the necessary budgets. We do not want a team which makes a fool of itself.”

    Given that Spain has shown virtually no support for Hispania except to issue them a racing licence, I don’t think they have any place commenting on the team’s fortunes.

    “The balance of the car is not that bad. Simply, we just have not enough downforce, and the people in the team have to realise that.”

    While Virgin’s pace might not be there, I think they’ve been the smartest of the sophomore teams in nailing their reliability (assuming their talk is genuine). A lighting-fast car might be nice in theory, but if the reliability isn’t there – take note, Mr. Fernandes – then it’s all for nought.

    1. As for the Spanish federation, I suppose their support was just about as much as they gave to Alonso before winning the WDC, perfectly nothing at all.

      As for Virgin, if they are reliable it might prove to be just what the team needed to get more success. But to move forward they will need to encorpprate some fresh and exting design ideas. It seems Wirth does not have them, or is mabye reluctant to use them at this relatively early state.

    2. Thanks for the news on the Lotus saga. You really do good investigative reporting.

  14. “Apparently it’s fine at that corner… don’t see why though”

    With absolutly no biased in my body i’m telling you the reason for that is the fia didn’t want to punish their new world champion in the first race of the season.

    A) because it makes him look unskilled to keep getting reprimanded and that makes the other drivers look bad which makes f1 look bad and.

    B) Chances are he’d have cryed over the radio and it’s just not good for the (“new exiting youngest ever fastest” and what ever other tags he’s had stapled to his name) world champion to be seen throwing the toys out of the pram. In a billion dollar sport when there’s a lack of money jobs and far to many natural disasters, the whole worlds going to pot. The last thing the fia needed on the first race of the new season was a guy who is set for life, using formula one as a billion dollar loud hailer because he thinks he’s having a tough day. Wouldn’t have gone down so great with the people of japan australia and new zeland, many of whom have experienced recently just how bad a day can be by loosing everything they have worked their entire lives for not to mention family members and friends. Then their’s numerous middle east countrys that are on the brink of their own revolutions with civilians being killed beaten and abused dailey.

    I will add as well that corner is basicly identical to one of the corners at singapore. Hamilton got a penalty for driving around the outside of mark webber(I think it was mark) in identical fashion to vet vs but. So if it is indeed “fine” at that corner then why is it a different set of rules in singapore.

    Also I havn’t read the entire fia rule book but you know what? I don’t think it says cars must always have at least 2 wheels on the racing track except at turn 4 in melbourne.

    Solution? you saw the race you know what happened, ignore the fia and trust in your own interpritation and eyes.

    1. With absolutly no biased in my body i’m telling you the reason for that is the fia didn’t want to punish their new world champion in the first race of the season.

      You mean just like they didn’t punish new world champion Lewis Hamilton at the first race of the 2009 season? Oh wait…

    2. Yes, plausible theory; I can exactly picture that that’s how it went down with the stewards. Oooh, them! Don’t stop there, though, give us another one!

    3. I don’t really agree with your reasons, but the Webber (it was Webber, not Hamilton that was penalised for overtaking Alonso at Singapore) penalty is a good reference and shows that perhaps Vettel and Buemi should have been penalised even though they lengthened the track as some are saying.

      Having said that this corner might have all been discussed in the driver’s briefing – this is a possibility because I haven’t heard any of the victims mention it in post-race interviews.

    4. This is why the rule (“only use the track”) should be applied indiscriminately, because incidents like this detract from the sport and the conspiracy theories start.

      If they’re not going to put a car’s width of gravel beside the track, don’t let them leave it. If it was a wall, they wouldn’t drive into it. The only reason it’s not a wall is because that would be dangerous (unless you’re Monaco!).

    5. Was Buemi’s move before or after Vettel’s overtake there? If Buemi was let through first, it could point to consistent judging by the marshalls. If it was the other way around, your theory makes sense in a way.

      I can’t look inside the heads of the marshalls, but when I imagine turn 4 from racing in various games, I don’t want to run wide there because:

      a) you have to get back to the other side of the track real quick to have a go at turn 5 in full throttle
      b) the kerbs on the outside or somewhat lifted, but drop of again on the other side. I can’t find a picture explaining what I mean, but it’s sort of like a lower version of a speedbump on the road.

      I don’t fully approve with overtakes such as those made by Buemi and Vettel, but that is – atleast for me – why it seems somewhat plausible that the marshalls didn’t hand out penalties.

      1. approve of*

  15. Surely that gamble paid off,though early days but to me the car & driver combination don’t tell me why they won’t finish top 10 in every race.

    Nice video of Button, with modification (not by Tilke) F1 can race around it. It is a wonderful circuit.

    1. What modifacations could be made? getting rid of all the hills? F1 cars would fly going over them at speed, it just wouldnt work, and I am probably one of the only people hoping it doesnt happen, I have no intrest in a F1 race there.

      1. No not the hills but they need grandstand, some runoff area, & big pitlane.They too need to build some fences as F1 cars always fly.

        Why are you not interested? Melbourne will loose it’s host in 2015,not sure it will be renewed.

        1. I am not interested because I dont see there ever being a good race there, were would the overtakes be? just at the end of Conrod Straight, going through the top I would be surprised if the cars could follow closely behind other cars to setup the overtakes. And I like F1 at Albert Park, I thought it was fantastic when I went in 2009 and I hope they keep it.

  16. Yes, Well. I hope Mr. Chandok gets a chance to make it to turn 16 on a hot lap in an F1 car on a race weekend at his home GP. This means he has to achieve a similar feat sometime soon.

  17. So in that picture of Hamilton’s car, is the plank actually ripped off the floor of the car? If so how did that pass scrutineering?

    1. It would be listed as accident damage, not by them having an illegal ride height, so they wouldnt get a penalty for it.

      1. A point I was trying to make just after the race, finally I see someone else who agrees!

    2. Cars with accidental damage have gone on to score points on numerous occassions to remember. Broken front wings, damaged splitters, sidepods diffusers and what not. The rules never say yor car cannot suffer damage. So stop going on and on about this. Coulthard is not the one who wrote the FIA’s rule book, and it is unlikely you will be mentioning this if some disgruntled ex employee didn’t deliberately try to stir up some controvercy.

      1. Well point us to the regulation which say damaged cars that finish the race don’t have to pass scrutineering?

        For the record I have no idea what Coulthard said during or after the race.

  18. Fair words from Boullier. I can appreciate a rookie mistake bit that stunt Petrov pulled at Spa was plain old silly.

    His position at the weekend was not a fluke, he worked hard for it and deserved it. I’m quietly confident he will deliver again soon.

  19. I found a nice background article on DRS. Its more about how it works and gets into the cars than discussing the use of it.

    Interesting part about the manufacturing etc. It gives a very clear picture of how hard it would have been for HRT to begin building their car at as late a stage as they did.

  20. AlasF1:

    Beneath the reference plane lies the skid block (or ‘plank’ as it is better know to Grand Prix fans), which must run from the frontmost point of the reference plane (33cm behind the front wheels) to the rear wheels. It is made out of a material with a specific gravity of between 1.3 and 1.45, and must measure 30cm in width, with a tolerance of 0.2cm. Although it decreases in thickness towards the edges to allow a smooth design, the plank most importantly, when measured through six pre-cut 5cm diameter holes, has a tolerance of just one tenth of a centimetre on its 1cm thickness.

    Does the picture show that the plank did not conform in any of the six holes?

    I think I said eight holes in an earlier post(s) sorry got that wrong by the look of it.

    1. Anyone criticising HRT for “not bothering” should read this. If a piece of wood is this complicated, imagine how hard the rest of the car is to build.

  21. Spot on, ads.

    “It was not an easy decision because I would have had no excuses if he had failed for a second year.”

    Why would it have been hard to drop a driver who wasn’t performing? Because you love Petrov so much? Or because it really is about the roubles and it’s just our good luck that Petrov is actually good enough to improve from his bad first year>

  22. Hamilton would have lapped 5 seconds faster in the same car than Button.

    1. I wonder why he doesn’t do that all of the time, what with Button being so slow and all ?

      1. I think he means Hamilton would have been tempted to go for it and risk sticking it in the wall, rather than being a bit more responsible with it.

  23. Petrov scored just 27 points, finishing 109 behind team-mate Robert Kubica, and was predominantly the reason why Renault missed out on fourth place in the constructors’ championship to Mercedes.

    If you assume Petrov finished relative to Kubica the way Schumacher did to Rosberg in 2010, Mercedes still would have taken fourth place in the WCC by more than 20 points.

    1. ‘If’ is a very handy word isn’t it ? Also a very good poem by Rudyard Kipling, which many on here may find interesting to read.

      Particularly these part:

      “If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,But make allowance for their doubting too;”

      “Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
      And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise:”

      1. ‘If’ is a very handy word isn’t it ?

        Yes, it is. The point is that the article blames Petrov for costing Renault 4th place in the 2010 WCC. But that’s not even remotely true. Mercedes’ performance, while disappointing, was strong enough to comfortably secure them 4th place in just about every conventional scenario short of Petrov out-scoring Kubica on a reguar basis.

    2. Petrov was the reason Renault had money to develop the cars to just finish out of the top 4 last season.
      Perhaps they wanted to try the standard team tactic of collecting the money and then sacking the driver hoping the sponsor will remain on board.
      My guess is Lada just told them, no Petrov and your car is rubble.

  24. The pit-lane system is getting a complete overhaul for F1 2011.

    Yeah!

    1. Also yeah!

      It looks too quiet down there, we need bodies on the pit wall.

  25. Funny how we don’t notice when things are fixed but we sure do when they are not. I read the site update note and went oh! I didn’t notice so I closed and reopened and fantastic it open right away. I had been waiting a good 15 seconds for each new thing to open, but each time I knew it would be worth it when it did open.
    Thanks Keith and team , great job on this site love it.

  26. I must say, I do not rate Nick Heidfeld as a great driver. But after reading his blog, I cant help but feel a bit sorry for him.

    OK, I’ll never really go along with exuses for messing up the timing of a lap in Q1, but running into that HRT after first dealing with the Lotus and Virgin was really bad luck.
    KERS played up not only in Qualifying but also in the race. Buemi opening up the side must have given excellent proof of just how solid a job Renault did to get the exhausts in there. And having the DRS opening and closing randomly must have been quite a shock for Nick.
    That did it for me, lets give the guy a break and hope he has a bit less trouble next time round.

    1. The more finishers, the better.
      But if the DRS really had a life of its own, Heidfelds balls are gigantic, or his brain minuscule. Or both. If you only look at Sutil’s qualifying shunt, you know it simply cannot be true.

      I understand he had a bad day (weekend), and also that the Buemi-crash had massive impact, but to me so much detail, with at least one part of the story not holding up and so many things outside his responsibility… it doesn’t help to give him my trust.

      Luckily, I am not Erik Bouilier…

  27. @tim say what you want this isn’t about lewis different rules for different fools we all know vettel is ecclestone’ golden boy.

    Why don’t you grace us with your infinite knowledge and tell me the reason? I have checked the rule since posting that message and there is no exception in there for turn 4 in australia so what happened there then mr smarty pants?

  28. “My guess is Lada just told them, no Petrov and your car is rubble.”

    @oliver: If lada tells you that you know you’re in trouble they would know lol

  29. It making me increasing angry that the FIA can’t enforce their own rules and them come out statements like this, we are not stupid.

    http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/31032011/23/whiting-nothing-illegal-red-bull-wing.html

    What he really means is we know it break the rules but we can’t catch them i.e prove it.

    The only plus is that without such an advantage the RBR driver would be mid field ;-) it puts them in the running, otherwise we’d be back to just Mclaren and Ferrari.

    1. seems to be multiple ‘s’ missing from my post, where is that edit button

    2. As we’ve seen with Brawns double diffuser, in F1 it’s not about the intention of the rules, it is about what’s actually in them.
      The way FIA tests the wings, doesn’t prevent Red Bull from going against the intentions, by the agreed tests RB have a legal wing, but it flexes.
      Same for Sauber: it was not their intention to cheet with their wing, but according to the rules they did.

      1. No they have an illegal wing to the letter of the law, what it actually says. But the test does not enforce the rule… it is not like the double diffuser at all that was a loop hole, the wing is not.

  30. http://www.totalf1.com/full_story/view/371579/Whiting_Red_Bulls_wing_is_legal/

    F1Tecnical is also interesting.

    The problems for the other tests is WHY invest in copying something that is so obviously illegal, it will likely be banned sooner or later (2012).
    I think this is the most visual breaking of the rules in 30 years of watching F1, of course there might of been no visual things I or anyone else was ever aware of.

  31. UKfanatic (@)
    31st March 2011, 19:26

    This 3rd place doenst prove a thing Petrov maybe failing by finnishing 3rd who knows what Kub might have made anyway despite kubica no one knows if this 3rd isnt the only one in Petrov Career. Good Luck to the russian he is 1.85 like myself he proves that tall people can run on f1

    1. 2010 was the only season in Petrov’s entire racing career where he didn’t win a race.

      Just sayin’.

  32. If I’d remembered this article, Petrov’s exit from Renault (now Lotus) wouldn’t have surprised me.

Comments are closed.