QUOTE
__________________
"You are using his antics at the Turkish GP to big him up as a raw pure racer, when in reality he is nothing of the sort."

The things you are not considering through your hate-filled, blinkered view are far to numerous to bother listing.
But as for the rest:

QUOTE
_________________
"merely a driver who looks good but is ultimately not quick enough!" (oh dear..)
_________________

Not quick enough to what...?
...Not quick enough to have beaten Alonso in qualifying more often than not? (as a rookie)
...Not quick enough to have beaten Alonso in races more often than not? (as a rookie)
...Not quick enough to lead the championship table for most of the season and having a massive points lead with 2 races to go, and with the strongest possible team-mate in the same car.? (as a rookie)

Not quick enough for the hamilton-haters and their uncanny ability to see only things that enforce their negative 'judgements' and their zen-like capacity for discarding mountains of evidence to the contrary...?

QUOTE
________________
"But ultimately, his strategy failed because instead of chasing the leader, he fell back into the hands of 3rd place and was fighting to keep second. There has to be an end product to all the flamboyance and Lewis did not deliver on that."

ARE YOU SERIOUS...?
You seem to think that LH and Mclaren devised that strategy to win the race. That is absolutely not the case. It was damage limitation because of the tyre problems. FYI Damage limitation doesn't get any better than 2nd place.

A 3-stop strategy at Turkey is at least 5 seconds slower than a 2-stop, in-fact it's a lot more because of traffic. Yet guess what...? he came out of his last pit-stop 5secs behind Massa and he beat Kimi who only stopped twice.
(ok Kimi sustained minor front wing damage, but it didn't slow the car down as Kimi set the fastest lap, allthough it probably made the car oversteer a bit more in the fast corners, but that's water-off-a-ducks-back to an F1 driver)

QUOTE
"...instead of chasing the leader, he fell back into the hands of 3rd place and was fighting to keep second."

That's because the Ferrari on equal fuel loads and on the better tyres was a faster package regardless of drivers. The Ferrari also has a faster race-pace over the course of a stint because it doesn't work the tyres quite so hard. And the Ferrari hardly cares if it's on the prime or option tyre, whereas the Mclaren is dog-slow on the softs in the race.

Any considered and objective person knows that it was a phenomenal drive and second place is all that anyone could have achieved with a 3-stop strategy and  the 'option' tyre problems. If that's not an 'end-product' then I don't know what is.

QUOTE
_____________________
"F1 is a marathon not a sprint! It's all about managing what you have to get to the finish as quickly as possible."

Something which he has done many, many more times than he has not.
Something which he did last year better than Alonso who you hold up as a shining example.
Something which both Hamilton and Massa did better than Kimi in this very race who you also hold up as a shining example.

QUOTE
_________
"A bucket load of drivers can do what Lewis does..."

Who? What facts do you base this assertion on?

Kubica?
He got beat by Heidfeld in his first year, he didn't beat a 2xWDC. (but I do rate Kubica)

Rosberg?
He and his dad both know he would get beaten by Hamilton, that's why he stayed at Williams. (let's face it, if
Mclaren offered Rosberg the 2nd Mclaren seat alongside De La Rosa he would've been in there like a shot.)

Piquet?
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, etc...

Bourdais?
No chance.

Webber/Trulli?
They're good drivers but I think Hamilton would beat them because he beat Alonso who I believe is a better driver than both of them, plus they're both very experienced, you can only really compare other rookies.

And as for:
QUOTE "only a handful can do what Kimi and Fernando have achieved"

Kimi achieved 1 WDC in a car that more often than not was quicker than the Mclaren. What...? you don't think Hamilton will ever win a WDC after as many seasons as Kimi?

Alonso achieved 2 WDC's, yes, very good. But his teamate was never an issue and Hamilton so-far has always had very strong team-mates. If he didn't have the strongest possible team-mate last year he would have a WDC.

You may make a case for Alonso having the added kudos of beating Schumacher. Well kind of, you have to remember that the Michelin tyre was superior more often than the Bridgestone (both in qualifying and the race), and tyres are the biggest single determining factor on the speed differential between teams. So I would put it more like Michelin/Renault beat Bridgestone/Ferrari with Alonso being good enough to make it count.

Anyway 2 WDC's is very good. Hamilton's only in his second season and only a fool would rule out the possibility of him getting 2 or more.

QUOTE
_________________________
"A bucket load of drivers can do what Lewis does..."

How many drivers in the last 10 years have beaten a multiple world champion in the same machinery, yes that's right... only ONE! Lewis 'The Hammer' Hamilton. NOT 'bucketloads' as you ridiculously spouted!

Just like Justrace you base your opinions on your dislike of Hamilton, rather than objectively considering the facts. Something which is common to all 'Hamilton-bashing.'

Why don't you understand that if you downgrade Hamilton, you downgrade Alonso more!

On one side of the observable universe you have the concept of 'objectivity' and 'un-biased reasoning' and 28 billion light-years on the other side you have the 'Hamilton haters' and never the twain shall meet...

kensaundm31:

Just like Justrace you base your opinions on your dislike of Hamilton, rather than objectively considering the facts. Something which is common to all 'Hamilton-bashing.'

Bother to come up with any facts about the above? And don't think that you are objective with your opinion. And feel free to reply to the other thread with similar unfounded accusations. But very conveniently you ignore that now, don't you?

 Ha, ha, out of all that  you reply to that little snippet!

QUOTE 

Bother to come up with any facts about the above? 

END QUOTE 

The villenueve thread where you said

QUOTE

Hamilton should have it easier, because there is not the same level of competitors in the field as in 1997. Hamilton and McLaren will need to step up a gear if they want to win the WDC. And that tells me that Villeneuve was doing a better job, against better competition.
END QUOTE

I pointed out that JV had much the faster car and was up against only 1 world-class driver in a slower car and still only just won it because of Schumi's water leak in the final race. Whereas Hamilton is not in the fastest car and has to beat 4 world-class drivers.

 Quote something I have said that is not objective.

 What 'other thread' are you talking about?

kensaundm31:

 Ha, ha, out of all that  you reply to that little snippet!

QUOTE 

Bother to come up with any facts about the above? 

END QUOTE 

The villenueve thread where you said

QUOTE

Hamilton should have it easier, because there is not the same level of competitors in the field as in 1997. Hamilton and McLaren will need to step up a gear if they want to win the WDC. And that tells me that Villeneuve was doing a better job, against better competition.
END QUOTE

I pointed out that JV had much the faster car and was up against only 1 world-class driver in a slower car and still only just won it because of Schumi's water leak in the final race. Whereas Hamilton is not in the fastest car and has to beat 4 world-class drivers.

 Quote something I have said that is not objective.

 What 'other thread' are you talking about?

Well, you would be better off reading my reply and replying to that instead of ridiculing yourself in that way. As I pointed out there the level of competition does not come down to the number of competitors. But this is the wrong thread to have this discussion.

You still fail to have any facts that I dislike or hate Hamilton. If you call that a little snippet, you should avoid claiming the higher moral ground for yourself. You accuse other posters of dislike and hate of drivers, just because they dare having a different opinion than yours.

justrace:

kensaundm31:

 Ha, ha, out of all that  you reply to that little snippet!

QUOTE 

Bother to come up with any facts about the above? 

END QUOTE 

The villenueve thread where you said

QUOTE

Hamilton should have it easier, because there is not the same level of competitors in the field as in 1997. Hamilton and McLaren will need to step up a gear if they want to win the WDC. And that tells me that Villeneuve was doing a better job, against better competition.
END QUOTE

I pointed out that JV had much the faster car and was up against only 1 world-class driver in a slower car and still only just won it because of Schumi's water leak in the final race. Whereas Hamilton is not in the fastest car and has to beat 4 world-class drivers.

 Quote something I have said that is not objective.

 What 'other thread' are you talking about?

Well, you would be better off reading my reply and replying to that instead of ridiculing yourself in that way. As I pointed out there the level of competition does not come down to the number of competitors. But this is the wrong thread to have this discussion.

You still fail to have any facts that I dislike or hate Hamilton. If you call that a little snippet, you should avoid claiming the higher moral ground for yourself. You accuse other posters of dislike and hate of drivers, just because they dare having a different opinion than yours.

You must release your hate of Hamilton, otherwise it will balloon up inside to the point you will go off and do something crazy to your pet...

RaggedEdge:

justrace:

kensaundm31:

 Ha, ha, out of all that  you reply to that little snippet!

QUOTE 

Bother to come up with any facts about the above? 

END QUOTE 

The villenueve thread where you said

QUOTE

Hamilton should have it easier, because there is not the same level of competitors in the field as in 1997. Hamilton and McLaren will need to step up a gear if they want to win the WDC. And that tells me that Villeneuve was doing a better job, against better competition.
END QUOTE

I pointed out that JV had much the faster car and was up against only 1 world-class driver in a slower car and still only just won it because of Schumi's water leak in the final race. Whereas Hamilton is not in the fastest car and has to beat 4 world-class drivers.

 Quote something I have said that is not objective.

 What 'other thread' are you talking about?

Well, you would be better off reading my reply and replying to that instead of ridiculing yourself in that way. As I pointed out there the level of competition does not come down to the number of competitors. But this is the wrong thread to have this discussion.

You still fail to have any facts that I dislike or hate Hamilton. If you call that a little snippet, you should avoid claiming the higher moral ground for yourself. You accuse other posters of dislike and hate of drivers, just because they dare having a different opinion than yours.

You must release your hate of Hamilton, otherwise it will balloon up inside to the point you will go off and do something crazy to your pet...

RE you sound as if you are speaking with experience from your hatred of Kimi, talk about the pot calling the kettle black you are a fine one to give advice to anyone about disliking a driver I dont think.

KIMBO1:

RaggedEdge:

justrace:

kensaundm31:

 Ha, ha, out of all that  you reply to that little snippet!

QUOTE 

Bother to come up with any facts about the above? 

END QUOTE 

The villenueve thread where you said

QUOTE

Hamilton should have it easier, because there is not the same level of competitors in the field as in 1997. Hamilton and McLaren will need to step up a gear if they want to win the WDC. And that tells me that Villeneuve was doing a better job, against better competition.
END QUOTE

I pointed out that JV had much the faster car and was up against only 1 world-class driver in a slower car and still only just won it because of Schumi's water leak in the final race. Whereas Hamilton is not in the fastest car and has to beat 4 world-class drivers.

 Quote something I have said that is not objective.

 What 'other thread' are you talking about?

Well, you would be better off reading my reply and replying to that instead of ridiculing yourself in that way. As I pointed out there the level of competition does not come down to the number of competitors. But this is the wrong thread to have this discussion.

You still fail to have any facts that I dislike or hate Hamilton. If you call that a little snippet, you should avoid claiming the higher moral ground for yourself. You accuse other posters of dislike and hate of drivers, just because they dare having a different opinion than yours.

You must release your hate of Hamilton, otherwise it will balloon up inside to the point you will go off and do something crazy to your pet...

RE you sound as if you are speaking with experience from your hatred of Kimi, talk about the pot calling the kettle black you are a fine one to give advice to anyone about disliking a driver I dont think.

I'm just a neutral observer - it doesn't matter to me who puts up the best RACING entertainment... it just so happens that after MS's departure, I have found hope in the form of LH... Kimi does not inspire me, and therefore the truth hurts to a lot of his hard boiled fans.

Mr.Woody:

Does anyone have any insight to why it was only Hamilton who had "tyre worries".

Could it be cause by how he likes the car sliding around?
 

Lots of people do, including Ron Dennis, and Bridgestone, Hamilton is unable to look after his tyres, as you rightly point out, he's the only driver who cannot look after his tyres.

Gutsy call and a great show of damage limitation.

He won second place with that brilliant drive on the edge.

1. Stratedgy was set by Bridgestone who limited his second stint to 18 laps. First stint was set by qualifying fuel load- again great drive on the primes to make the biggest gains in the last sector. This would have given him a third stint on a two stopper that would have put him heavier than Kimi on his least favoured option tyres. He would have been unable to make up enough time to stay ahead of the much later stopping Kimi. 

2. Had he ignored the second stint limit, fuelled longer and driven to preserve his tyres, again he would have been unable to prevent Kimi passing in the first pit stop, With no way to make gains with the option tyres remaining. 

It is complete bull to suggest a two stopper would have kept him second place.  The only option for him was to drive as a racing driver and push it all the way, it became obvious that he would have to make a passing move on Massa to keep enough gap on kimi. He did so within two laps of being told that was what he had to do.

If anyone wishes to question anyones driving commitment, look no further than a lacklustre performance from Kimi. Ok be fair he stuffed it on the first corner brush with Heikki, but where was his racing drivers blood throughout all those laps, that the time difference at the end showed, had he tested his car and nerve a little more he maybe could have passed Lewis during Lewis's third stop or at least been close enough to have made a race of it in the final stint.

Missing out by 0.5s against a car that has done a three stopper when in a car capable of the fastest lap is the real story here.

To answer the original question, is it only Lewis that has these tyres problems, simply yes it is.

It took half a season last year to work out his driving ability, it took until the second half of the season where Ferrari have been traditionally stonger. Ferrari have had a number of years as Bridgestone official tyre test outfit, so those years of development have been aimed at optimising for performance from figures gained whilst on a Ferrari. Each circuit requires a different compound mix to produce tyres that are the best performance compromise for the most likely conditions. The Michelin disaster in the USA shows how vital the correct track data is in designing a circuit specific compound. ( That only Bridgstone had the recent resurfacing data as they make the Nascar tyres is a different story but shows how important testing is to tyres design.)

I am not suggesting collusion in tyres design optimisation by Bridgestone in favour of any team, but on the other hand I hardly see Ferrari not making maximum advantage from the ton of tyre compound design testing data that they have and the other teams do not. 

Simply Lewis will have to either adapt his style to be less punishing on his tyres, as his are the same as everyone elses tyres, or they will have to make the mechanical grip gains required to catch up with Ferrari.

You can be sure the team has racing blood flowing and they will not concede the title chase, and hope to hell we dont have to wait until Ferrari have a poor start to the next season before the Stepney case pops up as a distraction.

r macaw:

Gutsy call and a great show of damage limitation.

He won second place with that brilliant drive on the edge.

1. Stratedgy was set by Bridgestone who limited his second stint to 18 laps. First stint was set by qualifying fuel load- again great drive on the primes to make the biggest gains in the last sector. This would have given him a third stint on a two stopper that would have put him heavier than Kimi on his least favoured option tyres. He would have been unable to make up enough time to stay ahead of the much later stopping Kimi. 

2. Had he ignored the second stint limit, fuelled longer and driven to preserve his tyres, again he would have been unable to prevent Kimi passing in the first pit stop, With no way to make gains with the option tyres remaining. 

It is complete bull to suggest a two stopper would have kept him second place.  The only option for him was to drive as a racing driver and push it all the way, it became obvious that he would have to make a passing move on Massa to keep enough gap on kimi. He did so within two laps of being told that was what he had to do.

If anyone wishes to question anyones driving commitment, look no further than a lacklustre performance from Kimi. Ok be fair he stuffed it on the first corner brush with Heikki, but where was his racing drivers blood throughout all those laps, that the time difference at the end showed, had he tested his car and nerve a little more he maybe could have passed Lewis during Lewis's third stop or at least been close enough to have made a race of it in the final stint.

Missing out by 0.5s against a car that has done a three stopper when in a car capable of the fastest lap is the real story here.

To answer the original question, is it only Lewis that has these tyres problems, simply yes it is.

It took half a season last year to work out his driving ability, it took until the second half of the season where Ferrari have been traditionally stonger. Ferrari have had a number of years as Bridgestone official tyre test outfit, so those years of development have been aimed at optimising for performance from figures gained whilst on a Ferrari. Each circuit requires a different compound mix to produce tyres that are the best performance compromise for the most likely conditions. The Michelin disaster in the USA shows how vital the correct track data is in designing a circuit specific compound. ( That only Bridgstone had the recent resurfacing data as they make the Nascar tyres is a different story but shows how important testing is to tyres design.)

I am not suggesting collusion in tyres design optimisation by Bridgestone in favour of any team, but on the other hand I hardly see Ferrari not making maximum advantage from the ton of tyre compound design testing data that they have and the other teams do not. 

Simply Lewis will have to either adapt his style to be less punishing on his tyres, as his are the same as everyone elses tyres, or they will have to make the mechanical grip gains required to catch up with Ferrari.

You can be sure the team has racing blood flowing and they will not concede the title chase, and hope to hell we dont have to wait until Ferrari have a poor start to the next season before the Stepney case pops up as a distraction.

 

Rock on buddy! Great post... although I hope Hamilton does not get back to driving off the edge - that would be the death of this season...

RaggedEdge:

r macaw:

Gutsy call and a great show of damage limitation.

He won second place with that brilliant drive on the edge.

1. Stratedgy was set by Bridgestone who limited his second stint to 18 laps. First stint was set by qualifying fuel load- again great drive on the primes to make the biggest gains in the last sector. This would have given him a third stint on a two stopper that would have put him heavier than Kimi on his least favoured option tyres. He would have been unable to make up enough time to stay ahead of the much later stopping Kimi. 

2. Had he ignored the second stint limit, fuelled longer and driven to preserve his tyres, again he would have been unable to prevent Kimi passing in the first pit stop, With no way to make gains with the option tyres remaining. 

It is complete bull to suggest a two stopper would have kept him second place.  The only option for him was to drive as a racing driver and push it all the way, it became obvious that he would have to make a passing move on Massa to keep enough gap on kimi. He did so within two laps of being told that was what he had to do.

If anyone wishes to question anyones driving commitment, look no further than a lacklustre performance from Kimi. Ok be fair he stuffed it on the first corner brush with Heikki, but where was his racing drivers blood throughout all those laps, that the time difference at the end showed, had he tested his car and nerve a little more he maybe could have passed Lewis during Lewis's third stop or at least been close enough to have made a race of it in the final stint.

Missing out by 0.5s against a car that has done a three stopper when in a car capable of the fastest lap is the real story here.

To answer the original question, is it only Lewis that has these tyres problems, simply yes it is.

It took half a season last year to work out his driving ability, it took until the second half of the season where Ferrari have been traditionally stonger. Ferrari have had a number of years as Bridgestone official tyre test outfit, so those years of development have been aimed at optimising for performance from figures gained whilst on a Ferrari. Each circuit requires a different compound mix to produce tyres that are the best performance compromise for the most likely conditions. The Michelin disaster in the USA shows how vital the correct track data is in designing a circuit specific compound. ( That only Bridgstone had the recent resurfacing data as they make the Nascar tyres is a different story but shows how important testing is to tyres design.)

I am not suggesting collusion in tyres design optimisation by Bridgestone in favour of any team, but on the other hand I hardly see Ferrari not making maximum advantage from the ton of tyre compound design testing data that they have and the other teams do not. 

Simply Lewis will have to either adapt his style to be less punishing on his tyres, as his are the same as everyone elses tyres, or they will have to make the mechanical grip gains required to catch up with Ferrari.

You can be sure the team has racing blood flowing and they will not concede the title chase, and hope to hell we dont have to wait until Ferrari have a poor start to the next season before the Stepney case pops up as a distraction.

 

Rock on buddy! Great post... although I hope Hamilton does not get back to driving off the edge - that would be the death of this season...

 There are other teams thuogh such as BMW which seem to be no harder on their tyres than Ferrari, so speculation aside, there is no evidence to suggest that Ferrari have gained in the least.   Given that "each circuit requires a different compound mix to produce tyres that are the best performance compromise for the most likely conditions" and that this year's tyres differ from last year's, I fail to see where any back-data could possibly constitute an advantage anyway.

r macaw:

Gutsy call and a great show of damage limitation.

He won second place with that brilliant drive on the edge.

1. Stratedgy was set by Bridgestone who limited his second stint to 18 laps. First stint was set by qualifying fuel load- again great drive on the primes to make the biggest gains in the last sector. This would have given him a third stint on a two stopper that would have put him heavier than Kimi on his least favoured option tyres. He would have been unable to make up enough time to stay ahead of the much later stopping Kimi. 

2. Had he ignored the second stint limit, fuelled longer and driven to preserve his tyres, again he would have been unable to prevent Kimi passing in the first pit stop, With no way to make gains with the option tyres remaining. 

It is complete bull to suggest a two stopper would have kept him second place.  The only option for him was to drive as a racing driver and push it all the way, it became obvious that he would have to make a passing move on Massa to keep enough gap on kimi. He did so within two laps of being told that was what he had to do.

If anyone wishes to question anyones driving commitment, look no further than a lacklustre performance from Kimi. Ok be fair he stuffed it on the first corner brush with Heikki, but where was his racing drivers blood throughout all those laps, that the time difference at the end showed, had he tested his car and nerve a little more he maybe could have passed Lewis during Lewis's third stop or at least been close enough to have made a race of it in the final stint.

Missing out by 0.5s against a car that has done a three stopper when in a car capable of the fastest lap is the real story here.

To answer the original question, is it only Lewis that has these tyres problems, simply yes it is.

It took half a season last year to work out his driving ability, it took until the second half of the season where Ferrari have been traditionally stonger. Ferrari have had a number of years as Bridgestone official tyre test outfit, so those years of development have been aimed at optimising for performance from figures gained whilst on a Ferrari. Each circuit requires a different compound mix to produce tyres that are the best performance compromise for the most likely conditions. The Michelin disaster in the USA shows how vital the correct track data is in designing a circuit specific compound. ( That only Bridgstone had the recent resurfacing data as they make the Nascar tyres is a different story but shows how important testing is to tyres design.)

I am not suggesting collusion in tyres design optimisation by Bridgestone in favour of any team, but on the other hand I hardly see Ferrari not making maximum advantage from the ton of tyre compound design testing data that they have and the other teams do not. 

Simply Lewis will have to either adapt his style to be less punishing on his tyres, as his are the same as everyone elses tyres, or they will have to make the mechanical grip gains required to catch up with Ferrari.

You can be sure the team has racing blood flowing and they will not concede the title chase, and hope to hell we dont have to wait until Ferrari have a poor start to the next season before the Stepney case pops up as a distraction.

 

Oh yeah, very objective pffff, hahahaha, Oh you Brit Lewis fans don't know up from down but we forgive you. Like the boy you support (because of his nationality not his driving ability,that much is painfully obvious). Anyway carry on as you were.

its entertaining. 

no t.c.:

r macaw:

Gutsy call and a great show of damage limitation.

He won second place with that brilliant drive on the edge.

1. Stratedgy was set by Bridgestone who limited his second stint to 18 laps. First stint was set by qualifying fuel load- again great drive on the primes to make the biggest gains in the last sector. This would have given him a third stint on a two stopper that would have put him heavier than Kimi on his least favoured option tyres. He would have been unable to make up enough time to stay ahead of the much later stopping Kimi. 

2. Had he ignored the second stint limit, fuelled longer and driven to preserve his tyres, again he would have been unable to prevent Kimi passing in the first pit stop, With no way to make gains with the option tyres remaining. 

It is complete bull to suggest a two stopper would have kept him second place.  The only option for him was to drive as a racing driver and push it all the way, it became obvious that he would have to make a passing move on Massa to keep enough gap on kimi. He did so within two laps of being told that was what he had to do.

If anyone wishes to question anyones driving commitment, look no further than a lacklustre performance from Kimi. Ok be fair he stuffed it on the first corner brush with Heikki, but where was his racing drivers blood throughout all those laps, that the time difference at the end showed, had he tested his car and nerve a little more he maybe could have passed Lewis during Lewis's third stop or at least been close enough to have made a race of it in the final stint.

Missing out by 0.5s against a car that has done a three stopper when in a car capable of the fastest lap is the real story here.

To answer the original question, is it only Lewis that has these tyres problems, simply yes it is.

It took half a season last year to work out his driving ability, it took until the second half of the season where Ferrari have been traditionally stonger. Ferrari have had a number of years as Bridgestone official tyre test outfit, so those years of development have been aimed at optimising for performance from figures gained whilst on a Ferrari. Each circuit requires a different compound mix to produce tyres that are the best performance compromise for the most likely conditions. The Michelin disaster in the USA shows how vital the correct track data is in designing a circuit specific compound. ( That only Bridgstone had the recent resurfacing data as they make the Nascar tyres is a different story but shows how important testing is to tyres design.)

I am not suggesting collusion in tyres design optimisation by Bridgestone in favour of any team, but on the other hand I hardly see Ferrari not making maximum advantage from the ton of tyre compound design testing data that they have and the other teams do not. 

Simply Lewis will have to either adapt his style to be less punishing on his tyres, as his are the same as everyone elses tyres, or they will have to make the mechanical grip gains required to catch up with Ferrari.

You can be sure the team has racing blood flowing and they will not concede the title chase, and hope to hell we dont have to wait until Ferrari have a poor start to the next season before the Stepney case pops up as a distraction.

 

Oh yeah, very objective pffff, hahahaha, Oh you Brit Lewis fans don't know up from down but we forgive you. Like the boy you support (because of his nationality not his driving ability,that much is painfully obvious). Anyway carry on as you were.

its entertaining. 

Worst case of female hormone problems I've seen in years...

RaggedEdge:

no t.c.:

r macaw:

Gutsy call and a great show of damage limitation.

He won second place with that brilliant drive on the edge.

1. Stratedgy was set by Bridgestone who limited his second stint to 18 laps. First stint was set by qualifying fuel load- again great drive on the primes to make the biggest gains in the last sector. This would have given him a third stint on a two stopper that would have put him heavier than Kimi on his least favoured option tyres. He would have been unable to make up enough time to stay ahead of the much later stopping Kimi. 

2. Had he ignored the second stint limit, fuelled longer and driven to preserve his tyres, again he would have been unable to prevent Kimi passing in the first pit stop, With no way to make gains with the option tyres remaining. 

It is complete bull to suggest a two stopper would have kept him second place.  The only option for him was to drive as a racing driver and push it all the way, it became obvious that he would have to make a passing move on Massa to keep enough gap on kimi. He did so within two laps of being told that was what he had to do.

If anyone wishes to question anyones driving commitment, look no further than a lacklustre performance from Kimi. Ok be fair he stuffed it on the first corner brush with Heikki, but where was his racing drivers blood throughout all those laps, that the time difference at the end showed, had he tested his car and nerve a little more he maybe could have passed Lewis during Lewis's third stop or at least been close enough to have made a race of it in the final stint.

Missing out by 0.5s against a car that has done a three stopper when in a car capable of the fastest lap is the real story here.

To answer the original question, is it only Lewis that has these tyres problems, simply yes it is.

It took half a season last year to work out his driving ability, it took until the second half of the season where Ferrari have been traditionally stonger. Ferrari have had a number of years as Bridgestone official tyre test outfit, so those years of development have been aimed at optimising for performance from figures gained whilst on a Ferrari. Each circuit requires a different compound mix to produce tyres that are the best performance compromise for the most likely conditions. The Michelin disaster in the USA shows how vital the correct track data is in designing a circuit specific compound. ( That only Bridgstone had the recent resurfacing data as they make the Nascar tyres is a different story but shows how important testing is to tyres design.)

I am not suggesting collusion in tyres design optimisation by Bridgestone in favour of any team, but on the other hand I hardly see Ferrari not making maximum advantage from the ton of tyre compound design testing data that they have and the other teams do not. 

Simply Lewis will have to either adapt his style to be less punishing on his tyres, as his are the same as everyone elses tyres, or they will have to make the mechanical grip gains required to catch up with Ferrari.

You can be sure the team has racing blood flowing and they will not concede the title chase, and hope to hell we dont have to wait until Ferrari have a poor start to the next season before the Stepney case pops up as a distraction.

 

Oh yeah, very objective pffff, hahahaha, Oh you Brit Lewis fans don't know up from down but we forgive you. Like the boy you support (because of his nationality not his driving ability,that much is painfully obvious). Anyway carry on as you were.

its entertaining. 

Worst case of female hormone problems I've seen in years...

You mean besides your almost 6000 posts?