Again, great reply.

You lack the ability to actually discuss things. I guess it must be hard while knowing you're wrong.

You mean "It's not exactly racing if one driver is told by his team that they are not racing", after all, there is no evidence that either driver was told that they were not racing.

When you provide me proof of that, i will accept it.

There is actually - the radio transmissions to Hamilton.

pls show me the sector times...actually that will tell the truth better... as far as I know, we only have the full laptimes

show the sector times

Pit : 'Lewis We need you to save fuel, Both cars are doing the same'!

Lewis:- 'Jenson is closing in on me, you guys!!'

Pit: 'Understood Lewis'

Lewis: 'If I back off, Is Jenson going to pass me or not??'

Pit : ' No Lewis....No'

I don't think the drivers know their exact lap time during the race
And some 1/100 difference from lap to lap are usually

LMAO.

Ah great. Quote those and show us where he is told they are not racing.

Sector times

Right, thanks for that, although I don't see how it changes anything. Both cars are doing the same.. ok, so? They were indeed both put on a 1:31 target time, which both drivers neglected until Button started driving it after the fight. Hamilton was quicker than the target time, then way too slow for 1 lap, and then quicker again.

I don't know whether the drivers can actually see their lap time on their steering wheel or some LED. Kind of interesting to know actually.

Button leaves a car width at all times during this battle, which is unusual. Just moving over a foot to push Lewis onto the kerbs a little would have done the trick. Unfortunately this footage isn't great so I can't pinpoint the exact spot he could have done so.

And I stand by my dislike of this whole "target lap time" nonsense. It's team orders and nothing else. We never found out how much fuel was in Jenson's car, but my guess is that he had plenty. And it's kind of hard to tell exactly when the team frantically reiterates the save fuel message to Jenson. I'm curious as to whether it was done so as the cars are side by side (as shown in the FIA video), which is an extremely odd time to tell a driver to save fuel.

This summer break is obviously killing us if we're back to talking about this incident.

Yeah, you could be right about the 31.5 coming from Lewis. I just find it mysterious. I don't see it as in Jenson's character to do it if he knew. I don't see it as justified on the basis of laptime either though - because irrespective of what the laptimes were it's obvious that racing against a fixed laptime is not something a team would organise, so the 'hold station' meaning is as clear as day.

Jense saying he hadn't been given a laptime, then he had...

Like you I don't see it as a stain on Jenson's character but do I think the factual evidence is much more against him than for him. That was my point of entry in many ways, that if you don't have faith in him, built up over his career, then a hostile view is very tenable. And the media really bought into the faith, it seems to me.

Anyway, it may or may not have a connection with Jakob's disappearance, presemably we will eventually find out about that.

One of us is watching the wrong kind of motor event.


I would have thought that after slowing down in front of Trulli in Australia '09, Hamilton would have realised what happens if he slows down enough for the car behind to overtake.
But it is fair to say that it would not be reasonable to expect Hamilton to interpret "No, Lewis, No" as "Not if you keep to the laptime target you have been given".

This "tracks suiting one or the other" idea has been pretty much debunked this season; they're not close enough in raw pace for it to make any difference. Jenson's fans might not like to hear this, but there really are no Button tracks with Hamilton as a teammate. Such forecasting only works when you have guys who are closely matched - like say Massa and Raikkonen - and, despite not knowing who will beat the other at the end of the season you can nevertheless forecast with confidence that Kimi will be quicker at Spa while Felipe will go better at Interlagos.

Lewis has basically been quicker everywhere but at Hockenheim; given what we've seen so far, and that he gave one of his best-ever F1 performances there two years ago, it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to attribute his not looking quicker than Button there alone to the lack of time he had to fine tune a set up that smoothed out some of the handling differences arising from the new EBD following his FP1 crash.

The only real uncertainty involves trying to predict at which tracks the gap between them will be larger than usual either because Hamilton particularly enjoys them or Button has historically not. Unfortunately for Jense at least five of the remaining tracks look like big-Lewis-gap tracks, so I see him stretching out a big points lead that more truly reflects the superiority he has shown over the season as a whole even before they get to Abu Dhabi, where he looks mega quick.

Leaving a car's width for a car that is inside of you is unusual?

Yes, if that means all four wheels of the other car remain on the tarmac and not the kerb. Leaving just a bit less creates a competitive advantage without wrecking the guy.

You mean, what Mark Webber tried to do about 15 minutes previous?

Touche. But I think trusting Lewis not to cause a wreck is a bit easier than trusting Vettel.

This incident can be looked at a number of ways. If you assume Button has more fuel (highly likely), then it was very magnanimous of him to back off (either during or after the battle) and take second. I'm sure both drivers were a bit annoyed at the team after that race, and it seems to me that the team handled it well because it has stayed in-house.

Definiitely a bit of contact between lewis's front tyre and the kerb but more importantly I'm not sure you're right.

I'd like to hear other people's opinions of this overtake and whether it is unusual to leave a car's width in those circumstances...

If he does leave a bit more room than usual the fact it's his teammate is a reasonable explanation in anycase.

I fear the tracks suit to RedBull
Spa and Monza are Ferrari terrain, too
and we need a Lewis at 100% and a Button qualifying in front of the Ferraris, to have a little chance of a victory at one of them
Singapore is bumpy & tight with slow corners, it will be awful, worse than Hungary

I don't think the MP4-25 will be easier to drive at the next races and there will be less time for set up and balance fine tuning , if the drivers have to test new parts and improve the EBD on FPs, in order to catch up with Ferrari & RedBull

Well, Hamilton when he overtook Button back showed that he was prepared to go that extra bit further, which I actually applaud him for. Button was a bit too nice, and it cost him.

On another note, does anyone, especially his fans, doubt Hamilton would not have had a go at Button if the positions were reversed? Come on... if anything, Button had a bit of a Lewis moment with that opportunistic move, but it didn't last long enough to make it stick, unfortunately.

Whitmarshs comment after the race, that some drivers should put their ego behind the team interests, and not risk a safe 1-2 victory ...
This was not adressed to Lewis.

Thanks WB. Interesting.

But what do you think he should have done? Closed the door? I think there'd have been an accident in that scenario and it would be jenson's fault?

As for the other thing, opinions appear to differ, I'd have applauded hamilton in that situation, others appear to think he would never do something so dastardly and if he did they wouldn't defend it...

Now what is it, does Whitmarsh always prefer Button, as we're told here repeatedly or would he critizise him like that? Both claims don't really go together, do they?

And shall I ask how do you know in the first place that it wasn't adressed to Hamilton? Probably not...

Our only hope is that the McLaren designers have had a eureka moment while lounging on the beach and scribbling car designs.

Button was not too nice , he made a little mistake at the corner exit
".. we were wheel-to-wheel for three corners, but it positioned me wrong for the final corner, I got a poor exit and he was able to get back past me along the pits straight and on the inside into Turn One. After that, I was told to save even more fuel because I was pretty close to critical. It was a tough battle, but "

Lewis stroke back with all his great overtaking skills. Perhaps, if it was not Lewis, Buttons overtaking maneuvre would have been sucessfull.

But you know how marginal those things are, usually. I don't think one can state the underlined so categorically, it would all depend on the fine details, how much and how far everyone moved, etc. Like tkulla I think Button left relatively much room, he could have pushed a fair bit further without it being considered downright nasty or unfair.



Well you know that the last isn't really true. Quite few of exactly those who now try to label Button sort of a cheat over it would defend the same move to death if it was done by Hamilton.

I guess it's impossible to say without it happening but I'm still not sure whether cars on the inside do often get pushed off the track/onto the kerbs



Maybe a smiley was necessary to indicate the subtext of what I meant!

I think indeed Button had compromised his exit too much, because he left too much room for Hamilton through the chicane. Had he forced him more over the curbs, Hamilton would have been compromised more. That's being too nice in my book.

But I know we'll not agree over it, it absolutely has to be something like Hamiltons "great overtaking skills". I understand that.

Seems so...

Ah so you're not talking about the actual overtake but the lead up to it?

Are you serious?!

Are you actually being serious??????????????????

**** it, why not phone HRT and tell them not to bother racing because they get "destroyed" in qualifying. And whilst your at it, everyone below the top 6?? What about the whole grid after Redull at Hungary? What right did Alonso have finishing ahead of Vettel? Vettel destroyed him in qualifying? What right did Alonso have??

Also, even better: "slightly misjudged"

LOL you've made my day. A driver does not slightly misjudge by about a second!! Thats a rather crucial mis-judgement!!

Im lookng at the times after the incident.... Lewis was quicker than this shitty "target time" Mclaren splurted out.

Bauss - stop banging on about the onboard, we've all seen it many times before. you visually see jenson close in the 2nd sector... okay lewis didnt make an out right mistake, but he did make poor judgement.

No class from Jenson in your opinion, but i suppose Australia 09 was pure class from Lewis.

edit - Greneda, I applaud you for wishing to change the subject, but even you must seen how silly grundles post was. Apparently nobody has the 'right' to race Lewis. I imagine he's still abit sore about Monaco 07

Whitmarsh to Lewis on pit radio at the lap to parc ferme : "It was a thoroughly, thoroughly deserved win, Lewis"
(I've quoted this some where at this thread before, and it stood on the Macca side right after the race, unfortunaltely not until now)

Lewis was leading the race until Button tried to overtake him, why should Whitmarsh mean Lewis, to risk a safe 1-2?

"Well Lewis, please don't risk a save 1-2 while you are leading the race , by trying to overtake..."
.... whom???

Not sure what you mean, I'm talking about the whole move that to me lasted from the point when Button outbraked Hamilton, run side-by-side through the chicane then getting ahead in the last part, but on a heavily compromised line. I think Button could have bullied a bit more all through the chicanes. I think he would have, if it wasn't his teammate.

your dear friend Whitmarsh himself , said recently, Lewis is the best overtaker of the world
(there is a quote somewhere I can search it if you don't believe it)

if Button forced Lewis over the curbs into the gravel, he probably would have had some problems afterwards

So, speculation, okay. Not really usefull, he could easily mean Hamilton getting back at Button, and quite a bit more bullish (therefore risky) than Buttons initial move. It's not as clear cut as you try to make out. Especially as Whitmarsh is known as such a Hamilton hater around here...

Dunno if he'd care about forum posters calling for his head...

I'm not doubting Hamiltons overtaking skills, have praised them often enough. Just in this case, as evident to the naked eye and confirmed by Buttons statement about the bad exit onto the straight, it wasn't really that difficult for Hamilton. Right after the last corner one could already see that he had much better momentum than Button.

Of course he meant Lewis to risk a 1-2 while leading the race

Perhaps I 'm speculting, but to say MW meant Lewis is simply absurd.
If Button had not tried to overtake Lewis with his opportunistic move, Lewis had not to reovertake

So why was Button told that fuel is critical now, and he must save fuel now, and not Lewis?
Why should he tell Lewis his win was thoroughly deserved

Okay. Jenson had as much right to overtake as Lewis does a reliable car. The point is Jenson got his bum bruised by Lewis after so badly that it looked more like a metaphor for sheepishness than a race event. The strange thing is, since that incident Lewis has well and truly beaten Jenson. I feel Lewis gained more than just a victory from that incident, it will have taught him a lot about Jenson.

Not the forum posters

What happened to Schumi after the last race, as he let Barricello not enough space?
do you really think Mclaren was amused if one driver forced the other off track

I wrote that Button made a little mistake, and had a bad exit at the corner
but you said, he was too nice
and now Lewis had a better momentum..
because?

Button made a mistsake and had a bad exit at the corner

This is ridiculous
I'm not going to answer you any longer

I've seen sillier tonight.

Grundle is entitled to his opinion. My point isn't about having a right to race - it is about having equal information, not taking advantage of another driver when you know they are slowing on team instructions, and lying to cover it up. The evidence is there - some people have interpreted it in their own strange way. I have just told it like it is (although some might say I have interpreted it strangely).

As for the "races" subject, what do you think?

I agree with that, and I hope it has.

Button did have more fuel; the team confirmed as much after the race. How much more, and whether the difference was enough to assure him of the win if the team had allowed them to race each other all the way to the flag, is another matter. So I would think giving him "magnanimous" on the facts we have would be a stretch - unless "magnanimous" is how you define the outcome of Button doing a rapid cost benefit analysis and working out that finishing second was a heck of a lot better than having you or your teammate or both not finish at all and ultimately getting the blame for screwing up a certain 1-2. Because if there had been a coming together, I seriously doubt there would have been a single person in the team on Button's side.

I'm surprised by the resurfacing of this debate, because I thought it was all pretty self-explanatory. Button, perhaps with the 'encouragement' of his then Race Engineer, tried a bit of a sneaky one - perhaps more, as someone has suggested, to explore the limits of what he could get away with at his new team than because he is a modern-day Pironi - and Hamilton showed him in no uncertain terms that it wasn't on. The way Hamilton went for the overtake suggested he would have been quite prepared to barge past Button a la Vettel on Sutil at Silverstone if Jenson hadn't given him room. He had the red mist and was absolutely furious at the prospect of - to his mind - being cheated out of a win. What he couldn't know at the time and in the immediate aftermath of the race with the adrenaline flowing was whether: (1) the team (i.e. Prew/Whitmarsh) had colluded in Button's move and effectively "set him up" by giving him the wrong answer about Button not overtaking if he slowed down; or (2) the initial overtake was down to Button on a frolic of his own; or (3) it was down to a piece of miscommunication involving Button and his RE.

The fact that Button's RE has not been seen since - having gone down with the type of 'mystery illness' that used quite regularly to carry off party apparatchiks that had offended Comrade Stalin, and who subsequently ended up being rubbed out of official photographs from many years previously - while he and Hamilton still seem to have a good rapport would indicate that he has accepted some variety of (3) as an explanation and that whatever element of naughtiness Button added to his RE's mistake / malfeasance has been forgiven or excused.

Perhaps Jenson was covering for his RE's mistake when he lied and tried to claim that no target had been set immediately after the race. Nevertheless the fact that someone as senior as Tim Goss made a point of directly contradicting what Button said to the press about NOT having been set a target time, despite having been given an opportunity to fudge and spare Jenson's blushes, suggests that the man from Frome did indeed get some sort of private talking to for his part in the incident. And it stands to reason, really. After the farcical scenes we had already seen between Vettel and Webber, McLaren would have looked completely brain dead if they had allowed Jenson's ambition to jeopardize a certain 1-2 AFTER they had both been set target lap times - which he must have known can only have meant one thing: "hold stations and bring the cars home". If he - or Hamilton were the roles to be reversed - thinks he can flout instructions like that with impunity t6hen he may as well look for somewhere else to drive. Teams are not paying these guys huge sums of money to make them look stupid in front of a global audience of hundreds of millions.

I was referring to the overtake by hamilton, which I assumed was what tkulla was referring to.

it was the decision to overtake Hamilton at that part of the track compromised his exit (which in my opinion is a part of racing) and all Hamilton had to do is follow him, positioned his car for a better exit and retake the lead, which he did.

Good post.

A few thoughts:

Button's denial of the "target lap time" thing could have been a disguising of team orders. I think it's very clear that team orders were applied (in the "hold station" sense).

Had Button stayed ahead and Hamilton then Lewis tried a "red mist" move taking them both out, I doubt the team would have been behind Lewis.

Button would have a good case for being against any hold station team orders in general, as he's the driver who is less likely to qualify ahead but more likely to have "more car" left at the end of the race. A hold station policy essentially eliminates the Prost strategy. Sadly, this hasn't come into play often because of the overly durable Bridgestone tyres.

Had the Red Bull collision not occurred, the battle between the two McLaren's could have been even more interesting. Assuming Button had a significant amount of fuel more than Hamilton, what would the team have done? If Lewis really had to save fuel he wouldn't have been able to take the fight to the Red Bulls. With Jenson on his tail with a bit more petrol, would they have asked Lewis to move aside and let Jenson have a go? It's hard to imagine Lewis liking that, but it would have been the good team move.

Simply put, no. Firstly, Button has not shown this year at any point that he is comfortable driving in the dirty air of the car in front for a sustained period of time, be it a Mercedes, Sauber or Red Bull. He prefers to get within a second or two and wait for the right moment to pounce. Remember the Malaysian Grand Prix: they gave Lewis the harder tyres because they knew he could make the passes on track (his strategy would flourish or flounder on his ability to hustle himself past cars) whereas Jenson had softer tyres so they would be able to employ a counter strategy if Jenson came up against a car he couldn't pass, they could pit early and do a longer second stint (as it played out). Furthermore, Lewis was able to stay within 1 second of Adrian Sutil for about 15 laps trying to hustle a mistake out of him. Secondly, Jenson tends to make his passes only at the normal overtaking places on a circuit whereas Lewis is more resourceful with his overtakes and where he does them (Vettel - turn 3 in Turkey; Rosberg - turns 11 and 12 in Australia; many cars - turn 8 and 9 in China). Combine this with his ability to enter a corner using an unorthodox line without sacrificing speed at the apex or the exit and Hamilton is the driver who'll always give the driver in front something to think about. Jenson is more regimented and calculating in his attacks and doesn't put constant pressure on the driver he is trying to overtake.

Brilliant post as ever.

I wouldn't disagree with that, lets see how it plans out.