Hindsight reasoning is weak but pretending Seb and Alonso were in comparable situations in their career isn't?

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

No that's a Honda apologist line, not mine. McLaren just optimised the car for best overall lap time, not strength on the straight. Just in Canada we had Hartley complaining about the low d/f of the STR again, just like Australia where they didn't run enough wing and killed their tyres.

They did improve in the second half last year but it's still 20kw + less than what STR started this year with which is significant.

McLaren's drag issue this year is directly linked to the suspension change they had to make to switch to Renault. The suspension doesn't work so they have to run more rear d/f which is causing excess drag, finally confirmed by EB in Canada though speculated a lot in recent months and called perfectly by a Mercedes source talking to AMuS in winter testing who said McLaren's unique rear suspension offered an aero benefit but would sacrifice too much mechanical grip and it did.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Both Williams amd Mercedes had better chassis's than Red Bull in 2014. Only in the wet and Monaco did it look better than Williams and it never looked better than Mercedes.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Easier than McLaren sure. They had excess room to deal with because the Honda was better packaged which allowed Honda to make good changes.

They've also switched engines in the winter 3 times in a row now.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

To be fair to Alonso...

Most of the arguments being put forth in this thread are based on the advantageous of hind-sight. When Alonso made the decision to leave Ferrari there were many forumites anticipating great things from the new McLaren/Honda partnership,Some even predicting an imminent WDC for Nando. There was a lot of hype about the Honda might and recollections of previous Honda F1 success. Can there be any doubt that Alonso had those same visions? The disaster that was coming in the McLaren/Honda pairing was seen by few, if any, and certainly not by Nando.

As an avid Ferrari fan, I was sorry to see them lose the best driver in F1, but given the political turmoil in the team and quality of cars, it is easy to see how confidence in the immediate prospects of Ferrari would fail to inspire confidence. It is hard to condemn Alonso for testing other waters as he had no way of expecting McLarens' troubles nor the Ferrari turnaround. If only be could have known what do many of us do!

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15

It is hindsight. Maybe you found him overrated but that surely wasn't the general opinion around the paddock, amongst pundits, amongst an overwhelming majority of the fans. Most thought, ESPECIALLY after Allison left, that Ferrari would continue the decline they were in and 2017 wouldn't be good for them.

Now you might have got another opinion on it than just about everybody in the business, but then are you blaming Alonso for not consulting Rockie at PF1 forum?

So yes, hindsight.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!

They stated that in mid-2017 and I have this distinct feeling that Abiteboul basically got spooked by Alonso's perceived negativity at various times during the McHonda period and that he feared the same kind of "PR".

He was less negative at Ferrari, used much less scathing and sarcastig language. Abiteboul's opinion on getting him might have been different if he had stayed at Ferrrari and won a few more races instead of looking like a fool at the back of the field.



? no he couldn't because Abiteboul said he didn't want Alonso at that point - you referred to it yourself so I don't understand you saying this now?



I don't know if he has interest or not, I think his interest for new multi-year projects has disappeared altogether after the McHonda fiasco. I suggested the possibility because if he hadn't endured McHonda, then maybe he would have still had some appetite for a new up and coming works effort.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!

If I as a fan can see it and people in it can't then there is a problem, especially for a driver, leaving out commentators who are biased.

If Alonso could not look at the track record of an engineer and the base of his information is the biased English media then no wonder he has found himself in his current predicament.

I repeat Allison is overrated asides riding the coat tail of others he has not led a championship winning design team.

So talking about hindsight is when you come off analysing a situation without logic in the first place.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/136700/alonso-glad-he-doesnt-have-undeserved-trophies


Looks like a dig at Vettel, but maybe I'm reading too much into it.

Bitter to the very end, it's laughable I'm sure Vettel cries himself to sleep whilst he is in a club only 5 men are members.

What a jealous and bitter human being.

No I don't think you are. Question obviously put his back up a bit so he gave a bit back.

Female doggy question gets female doggy response type of thing.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

It does indeed look like a dig at someone... Perhaps even two someones.... Vettel and Hamilton. If his complaint is that championships were won by drivers in dominate cars. Probably not the wisest thing Nando could have said.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15

Especially not considering his own situation coming up this weekend. Opened the door to some awkward questions afterwards.

This is definitely one area Seb knocks him out the park on. Ask Seb a similar question or one likely to needle Seb himself and you'll get some variant of "I don't care" or "It's for others to say"..etc. Alonso just bites every time.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Sorry mate, but this is all some serious BS. Ferrari wanted him, and they know loads more than you. It's that simple.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!

Rockie, that is a mighty thin branch yiu have crawled out on there.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15

Every car is different to the one they had last year.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

Maybe McLaren themselves can

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/43904342

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

I see your point but McLaren themselves had not won a race since 2012 and the last title was in 2008 and would have a totally unproven engine, if he couldn't see Ferrari turning things around anytime soon why were Mclaren going to do any better?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

Actually I worded it wrong he didn't actually leave he got pushed, Alonso was getting preferential treatment up until Monaco and then Hamilton complained to the British press that he was just the #2 driver.

Hungary was an argument over who should get the advantage of the fuel burn in qualifying, Hamilton had the advantage at the previous race but his car failed in qualifying so he never got the advantage, therefore he argued it was still his advantage in Hungary and basically he wouldn't back down.

Overall it would have been such a better match up if there had been no race fuelled qualifying and just a straight forward match up like we have today.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

Why sack a designer that has worked at McLaren since 1990 for one bad car when the previous one was so good, unless.....

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

In this instance the fitting of the Renault engine has been specifically blamed.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

The optimisation of the car though made it even slower on the straight, Red Bull on the other hand tend to take down force off to make their car more competitive on the straight.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

I would dispute that in the case of Williams given the superiority of the Mercedes engine.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

Which allowed Honda to make good changes, which presumably they would never have been able to make had they stayed with McLaren?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

So you are basically agreeing that Renault was never on the cards for Alonso.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

He seems to be quite happy with the winners trophy from Singapore 2008.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

Lewis screwed Alonso at Hungary, which is why Alonso retaliated as he did. That weekend marked the beginning of the end for Alonso at McLaren. Neither played "fair" and neither of them covered themselves in glory.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15

I think they just offered two bites at a cherry he knew he wasn't going to get at Ferrari. I think he was right that Ferrari would take longer than the duration left on his contract before they could challenge Mercedes and Honda at least offered the chance of hitting the ground running like Mercedes. There was a lot of fuss at the time about the split turbo being key for Mercedes and Honda had it as well,and in general a lot of hype.

That and the disillusionment at Ferrari might have been enough to think it was worth a shot. Lewis's gamble being such a success might have had an influence as well. I think there was a lot of things floating around in that time including the death of Botin and LdM getting ousted.

There was probably dozens of factors.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Not sure he needed much pushing after having to get someone in to give him peace of mind his tyre blankets weren't getting fiddled with after China and Japan. Total breakdown in trust from both sides so why would you want to stay? Made sense for everyone to part ways at that point.

Totally agree about fuel burn qualifying. Rotten waste of time that left many a slanted view on performances.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

..he had some other suspension nightmares on his recent record and who knows what else.

No-one's saying McLaren nailed their suspension or chassis every year. They've had ups (last year)and downs(Butterfly) in this turbo era alone for example.

He could've been moved on for more than just the suspension of course.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Yes and you mentioned Red Bull who's chassis last year was designed for the Renault so obviously they didn't have the same problem as McLaren had with installation as the McLaren chassis was designed for a different one. One had to adapt theirs and the other didn't.

And can we stop with the constant peddling of McLaren unwilling to compromise on their chassis with regards to Honda and their engine. Do you seriously think they're going to refuse Honda changes that will compromise the car but then go and compromise it themselves by switching to Renault?

It wasn't plug 'n' play, they had to change the entire rear of the car and extend the wheelbase so why on earth would they deny Honda the same possibility of compromise?

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Doesn't matter if it's slower on the straight as long as it's faster overall, it's not a drag race. Red Bull have a better chassis which produces more d/f everywhere I'd imagine, they can do things McLaren can't you'll get no argument from me on that front.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Some in Mercedes felt it was the best chassis on a few tracks but fair enough, it's hard to argue when the engine was so dominant to be fair.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Depends what they put forward to the chassis department I'd imagine. It was a works partnership, no one side works alone. McLaren chassis department allowed changes every winter, a big redesign in their last winter and then another to fit the Renault in.

This idea they wouldn't compromise doesn't tally with what we know they did at all so as long as the proposed changes gave them better performance then why say no?

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Can you explain to me how that follows from what I said?

What I'm actually saying is that even if he had not left Ferrari after 2014, he would have been well fed up mid 2016 and Renault might have been a possibility given the renewed factory effort.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!

Didn't see anything in that article where McLaren talked about last year's chassis?

then why are you still peddling the myth that this year's troubles proved last year's car was terrible?

Agreed with all Blake

Keep telling yourself that.

When Redbull wanted Max they caved in to his demands.

Well Alonso was campaigning in the back ground for the team to back him against the Ferrari drivers even though Hamilton was leading the WDC, sure Hamilton got paranoid and believed he was being disadvantaged unfairly 3 qualifying sessions in a row but that was the result of Alonso's politics.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)