If Alonso were to have Perez as a teammate next year...

[Hampus Andersson]

It's actually very simple for me. I go with proof, you go with spanish articles that have no proof in them.

I wont say it anymore, Mclaren have ALWAYS treated both drivers equally.
This is the Mclaren way!

FIA is neither a British or Spanish organisation and so far we have ZERO, NADA, NO evidence to suggest the team treated one driver better then the other.
What we have is a butthurt Alonso. That´s about it.

You can post 55 more articles from Spain, it simply won´t change that fact.

Regarding tire pressures,

Q: (James Allen - ITV) Can you clear up the issue of the tyre temperatures in the final run in Q3 in China. Fernando said again yesterday that they were a bit high and he didn't know about that at the time. Can you clear up whether that is the case?

RD: You can't just do a yes/no answer to that, so I will try and give you an understanding and it will be interesting to see if Jean and Flavio have the same point of view. A racing tyre is a very challenging thing to understand.

The pressures on a racing car's tyre are influenced by several things. The first thing about China is that it was incredibly humid throughout the entire weekend, which means that keeping the humidity out of the fitting cycle, out of the cleansing cycle, purging cycle was very difficult, so maintaining consistency in tyre pressures through their heat range is very difficult.

Second thing is, no tyre is pre-set to the pressure at which it runs on the circuit. You are trying to determine how much more pressure a driver is going to put into the tyre on the out lap and you target that and virtually every tyre goes out with a different pressure to each other depending on where it is on the car and then you project, based on your experience in practice, where the tyre is going to finish in its given one lap and then coming in on a cooling lap.

So you are targeting something which is an inconsistent and I would say that the ability of our engineers to get our tyre pressures absolutely to within a tenth of a pound when the cars come in after qualifying they probably achieve it less than 10 per cent of the time because of the intense variables.

So all of the tyres that came in on both of our cars were out of the optimum pressure target that we had set for them. Is it true that they were a bit high on our tyres? The answer is yes. Were they abnormally out of target in relation to the challenge? No.

If, as we were able to analyse, the performance between the two cars, there was below five-tenths of a second difference between the drivers qualifying, two and a half tenths were fuel difference because Lewis was fuelled lower and most of the time that Lewis made up on Fernando was at two specific braking areas, one in which he picked up nearly two tenths of a second and the rest of the lap took care of the rest.

So the difference in lap times was fuel load and specific points on the circuit where Lewis did a very good job on braking. And they are the facts, the absolute facts. Maybe not what Fernando felt when he got out of the car, but I feel sure he understands now.

 

[Xosé Estrada]

It's actually very simple for me. I go with proof, you go with spanish articles that have no proof in them.

I wont say it anymore, Mclaren have ALWAYS treated both drivers equally.
This is the Mclaren way!

FIA is neither a British or Spanish organisation and so far we have ZERO, NADA, NO evidence to suggest the team treated one driver better then the other.
What we have is a butthurt Alonso. That´s about it.

You can post 55 more articles from Spain, it simply won´t change that fact.

Regarding tire pressures,

What fact? James Allen opinion?
"Hampus says McLaren alawys threated drivers equally" - This fact? Have you any proof about your personal factpinion about it? That is not a fact man, that is what you think, is not the same thing you know?

Hampus really, stop it, you look like a child here... you were sure there was no tyres situation, you clearly had no idea about it and you repeated different times that was invention of spanish "pseudoarticles". And not only happened (you can read Ron Dennis defending himself in Speed), but the FIA sent a special marshall to Brazil to prevent something like that happening again. This are the facts, stop acting like a five year old that can't loose a discussion

The only discussion about it is if was a mistake, like McLaren claims, of if it was on propose, like Alonso said and FIA suspected (therefore the marshall in Brazil).

 

[Hampus Andersson]

No you are the child, the religious thinker working without any proof whatsoever but use it as fact.
You say Mclaren have treated Alonso and Hamilton unequally.

PROVE IT.
You have no proof, all you have is 4 spanish articles that doesn´t prove anything.
FIA has already done several investigations, nothing was found = Equality.
I know it´s very hard for you to grasp such an easy concept but i´m not surprised.

P.S. the tire situation does NOT PROVE anything. Ron even gave an explanation to why that can happen.

Maybe we should say the team favored Button when the pit crew F´d up every stop Hamilton had?
No because that would be illogical thinking. i´m sure you are familiar with that concept.

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

Can you also (loose) a discussion without using swear words Hampus? Relax man.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Let me guess, Perez almost binned the car on purpose in Malaysia just so he can have his chance at Ferrari by not overtaking Alonso?

I bet you read that in your wonderful sources as well.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Can you also (loose) a discussion without using swear words Hampus? Relax man.

Sorry i´ll try to keep it non swearing.

Obviously people have a hard time grasping that there is no proof whatsoever that Hamilton was treated better then Alonso.

 

[Xosé Estrada]

No you are the child. You say Mclaren have treated Alonso and Hamilton unequally.

PROVE IT.
You have no proof, all you have is 4 spanish articles that doesn´t prove ****.
FIA has already done several investigations, nothing was found = Equality.
I know it´s very hard for you to grasp such an easy concept but i´m not surprised.

All I have is many articles in Spain and also Speed and also the actions FIA took for Brazil, don't avouid the information you don't like.

P.S. the tire situation does NOT PROVE anything. Ron even gave an explanation to why that can happen.

What I maintained I proved, is that the tyre pressures situation happened (you denied it before) and that there are two versions about it.

Already told you then you have to choose if believe Dennis or Alonso, and told you what I decided an why, based also on FIA decision for Brazil.

You were denying the tyre pressures fact and saying that was an invention of Spanish press, and even if I showed it to everybody also present on Speed, you avoid to include that in the conversation and keep talking from your prejudices against Spain.

Maybe we should say the team favored Button when the pit crew F´d up every stop Hamilton had?

There was any conflict in the team at the time that suggest that could happen, or did Hamilton accused them of doing it, or there was any polemic? No, so if nobody say it is unlikely that happened.

No because that would be illogical thinking. i´m sure you are familiar with that concept.

I'm the only one argumenting here and basing his statements on arguments, which is one of the principles of logical thinking.

You on your side just showed your prejudices against me (taking sentences out of context about religion and disrespecting the place of the world I come from, something you didn't explain yet) and went agressive when you are in a dead end in the conversation.

Maybe that approach to debate is what you consider logical?

 

[Hampus Andersson]

All I have is many articles in Spain and also Speed and also the actions FIA took for Brazil, don't avouid the information you don't like.

Yes and what do they prove? ZERO.
they only say that Alonso´s tire pressures were higher in one or two set of tires.

That does NOT mean the team is favoring Hamilton.
Did the Spanish press also report about Ron´s answer to that?
Of course not, that would be completely against the propaganda machine they have started which bases itself on the non-fact that Hamilton is being favored.

What I maintained I proved, is that the tyre pressures situation happened (you denied it before) and that there are two versions about it.

Already told you then you have to choose if believe Dennis or Alonso, and told you what I decided an why, based also on FIA decision for Brazil.

News flash: If FIA found Mclaren to breach the rules in terms of favoring one driver they would have gotten penalized.
Favoring one driver is the same as team orders.

Again, see if this sticks, NOTHING HAS BEEN PROVEN in terms of Mclaren favoring any driver.

I´m sure i can take it in spanish if you want?

You were denying the tyre pressures fact and saying that was an invention of Spanish press, and even if I showed it to everybody also present on Speed, you avoid to include that in the conversation and keep talking from your prejudices against Spain.

Actually i wasn´t. If you read the F1Technical link i provided you would see that is being discussed there as well.

Together with an answer from Ron. Again, no proof of any favoring of a driver.
It´s all thin air.

There was any conflict in the team at the time that suggest that could happen, or did Hamilton accused them of doing it, or there was any polemic? No, so if nobody say it is unlikely that happened.

Not even sure what you are talking about here.

Remember it was Hamilton who first started the FIA investigations because he felt he wasn´t allowed to race Alonso in Monaco.
Just that simple fact, which you ignore every single time nullifies your whole argument.
Apart from the obvious NO PROOF in any case.

I'm the only one argumenting here and basing his statements on arguments, which is one of the principles of logical thinking.

No you are taking news articles and raised tire pressures as facts that Hamilton was being favored.
You are dead certain he was despite no proof whatsoever has been put forward that is the case.

I´m sorry but you are not using an ounce of logic in your thinking.
You a consistent basis ignore the fact that no proof in any case has been put forward as facts.
So what you have left is two sets of tires with slightly raised tire pressures and a bunch of articles from Spain.

You on your side just showed your prejudices against me (taking sentences out of context and disrespecting the place of the world I come from, something you didn't explain yet) and went agressive when you are in a dead end in the conversation.

Maybe that approach to debate is what you consider logical?

You are the one taking sentences out of context, even mixing in some irrelevant crap like James Allen in your prior post.

I´m not in a dead end. You are. You are the one without any proof, your argument is grasping for straws to make a case.

Again, simple statement.

PROVE THAT HAMILTON WAS BEING FAVORED.

If you can´t do that then this discussion is nothing, simply thin air.
Prove that Hamilton was being favored and then we can move on.

Raised tire pressures and spanish articles is NOT considered proof.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

And what you can do when you find actual proof of favoritism, send it to FIA.

Then come back here with their response. I´m dying to hear what they will say.

 

[Xosé Estrada]

And then here comes the logical falacy

"When you have proof of the US troops fighting in Vietnam, send it to ONU"

You can never have that proof in your hands, you can just believe testimonies and material from other people, like in any case not involving you directly or the people around you.

Anyway, I think what it's in this thread is more than enough about this subject, let each one made his own conclusions.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Ok but then we have concluded that you first of all think you have better resources the FIA to make a decision whether any favoritism occured.
Despite them having multiple investigations regarding exactly this topic.

And you think that anomalies regarding certain events (but only for Alonso, not the ones for Hamilton) is enough to say, yes Hamilton was favorited.

Great at least now we know where we stand.
I think it´s pretty clear who´s using the logic here and who isn´t.

P.S. your Vietnam thing is a useless argument.
You are basically telling me to prove there isn´t a god.
When in reality it´s you that should prove to me there is one.

Example, if i make a statement that Santa Claus lives in my basement, i actually have to provide evidence for that, not say No you prove to me he doesn´t live there.

See the logic? (or lack of)

 

[Xosé Estrada]

Ok but then we have concluded that you first of all think you have better resources the FIA to make a decision whether any favoritism occured.
Despite them having multiple investigations regarding exactly this topic.

Man, you can ask anybody that knows me, I have INFINITE energy to unmask any twisted last word you want to have on this post, so that won't work really.

Let's first conclude that you were mocking me during several post for something you didn't know and that happened to be true. You told me that I had false Spanish press articles about FIA investigations on Alonso's tyre pressures in China, that was all lies coming from Spain because we embrace things blindly, that I was lying and believing BS, etc. Then I posted you here an article about the polemics on Speed (US) and then you changed strategy.

What everybody knows now, is that Alonso complained that his tyres in China were overinflated. The fia run an investigation and concluded the tyres were indeed overinflated by more than 600g, which is a lot, but wasn't sure that was intentional (something really difficult to prove) and had to accept the explanations from McLaren, even if there were 5 different theories, one including overheated tyre warmers.

Still they were in doubt about McLaren giving a fair treat to Alonso so for the last race of the season they sent a special marshall to control that. If they were sure that all was bullshit and that the McLaren explanations were perfectly fine, they would never do that, as it's something really exceptional.

Knowing this, and knowing what the situation of Alonso was at the team, the team reactions to his wins or poles, etc. I opine that the overinflated tyres (fact you denied and mocked, remember) were not coincidental and was part of McLaren favouring Hamilton.

And you think that anomalies regarding certain events (but only for Alonso, not the ones for Hamilton) is enough to say, yes Hamilton was favorited.

Great at least now we know where we stand.
I think it´s pretty clear who´s using the logic here and who isn´t.

Oh that is indeed clear

P.S. your Vietnam thing is a useless argument.
You are basically telling me to prove there isn´t a god.
When in reality it´s you that should prove to me there is one.

Example, if i make a statement that Santa Claus lives in my basement, i actually have to provide evidence for that, not say No you prove to me he doesn´t live there.

See the logic? (or lack of)

You completely misunderstood it.

It wasn't talking about having to prove anything, it was about on how an individual can prove things in a forum.

We don't have the FIA internal documents in our possession and we never will, so we have to argument things with the resources available.

When you doubted time ago about the qualy polemics in Hungary, I proved it to you using real fotage and teams radio from youtube. That is the level we can reach, I will never have full telemetry, radio transcriptions and FIA investigations. Maximun I can do (like I did now) is to show you what people who has them said and acted (like sending a special marshall to Brazil)

Is like if I ask you for a rock from Mars to prove Mars exist , it's a falacy, just a kids trick to never accept a defeat. You can prove me Mars exists with scientific testimonies, nasa pictures, etc. but you will never have that rock in your hand

By the way I think science, even if still is not able to prove the non-existence of god, provided enough evidence to suspect a completely different origin for life and universe than all the religious book from all religions. That should be enough for somebody that believes in rationalism. Some (like you) will say that is not enough even for be in doubt that god exists (or that McLaren treated drivers equal in 2007)

Hope you understand it now.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

You are unbelievable. You won´t be able to get yourself out of this one no matter how many lines of BS you write.

PROVE IT. Do you understand those words?

Do you understand that everything you say means NOTHING if you can´t prove it?

Again, last time i will write this, if you make a claim that Hamilton was being favorited then prove it.

If you can´t prove it then you have NOTHING. Zero, Nada,

Hopefully this will stick inside that space between the ears.

Imagine the world working like your "logic"

- that guy stole my car!!
- Are you sure?
- Yes of course i am!
- Can you prove it?
- Ehh no, why should i? I "know" he´s stolen it.
- Ok then *calls men in white coats*

Or even better,

- This guy stole my car!
- Are you sure?
- Yes of course i am!
- Ok we will launch 3 investigations ASAP.
- *investigates* Nope sorry we could not find anything that supports this theory.
- but you are wrong!! He stole it!
- No he did not, unless you have proof of it you can´t go around saying he stole your car.
- of course i can
*prison*

 

[Xosé Estrada]

Same falacy again

Is like if I ask you for a rock from Mars to prove Mars exist , it's a falacy, just a kids trick to never accept a defeat. You can prove me Mars exists with scientific testimonies, nasa pictures, etc. but you will never have that rock in your hand

By the way I think science, even if still is not able to prove the non-existence of god, provided enough evidence to suspect a completely different origin for life and universe than all the religious book from all religions. That should be enough for somebody that believes in rationalism. Some (like you) will say that is not enough even for be in doubt that god exists (or that McLaren treated drivers equal in 2007)

You are completely offside now.

- This guy stole my car!
- Are you sure?
- Yes of course i am! look, here it is at his house (the TYRES WERE INDEED OVERINFLATED)
- Ok we will launch 3 investigations ASAP.
- *investigates* We suspect it's true but we don't have enough evidence because he says it was unintentional cause his aunt's car is same model and color.
- but you are wrong!! He stole it!
- We suspect that, yes, so we will send a policeman to follow this guy all the next week.
- Ok!
- They indeed send a policeman following the guy

This is actually closer to what happened than your twisted rant.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Same falacy again

You are completely offside now.

No you are so offside i´m not sure you will ever find your way back.
You apply NO LOGIC, NO PROOF NO NOTHING in your arguments.
come back when you actually have proof. CYA.

Do you not understand that you can´t go around saying Hamilton was favorited without any proof?
Do you not understand FIA did MULTIPLE investigations throughout the year?
Do you not understand that you don´t even have 1% of the resources FIA have to figure this thing out?

Do you understand that you are grasping for straws like nobody else?

If these questions turn out to be no, no, no and no then i rest my case. Have fun with your failed logics.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

 

[Xosé Estrada]

Are you 3 years old or what?

Can't you argumentate like an adult?

Is like if I ask you for a rock from Mars to prove Mars exist , it's a falacy, just a kids trick to never accept a defeat. You can prove me Mars exists with scientific testimonies, nasa pictures, etc. but you will never have that rock in your hand

By the way I think science, even if still is not able to prove the non-existence of god, provided enough evidence to suspect a completely different origin for life and universe than all the religious book from all religions. That should be enough for somebody that believes in rationalism. Some (like you) will say that is not enough even for be in doubt that god exists (or that McLaren treated drivers equal in 2007)

Do you understand this? Or am I loosing time here.

Where Alonso's tyres anomalously overinflated? Yes.
Did FIA run an investigation? Yes.
What they concluded? They had reasons to suspect of unequial treat.
What FIA did? Send a special marshall to control McLaren at Brazil

But what can I tell you, until I showed you the Speed article you were denying that the tyres were overinflated, that never happened and was all product of lying Spaniards, and then few mins later you are an expert on this situation

 

[Hampus Andersson]

And what happened with FIA? NOTHING!!!!
2-3-4 investigations were made and not a single thing was found that could be used as evidence.
And yet here you are, thinking you have solved a got damn puzzle or something.
Congratulations but you haven´t solved anything. As there was never anything to solve from the start.

So what we have left is you grasping for straws.
The picture i made because it sums up you in a nutshell perfectly.

So there we have it, no proof no nothing thus any argument fails so hard its not even funny.
But i bet you will reply to this too as you probably still havent figured you are not going be right in this argument unless of course FIA sends out a report today saying Hamilton was favorited.


Keep going lets see what you got, but by all means ignore the obvious lack of proof.
Better to go with the "i believe" instead.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Oh btw, almost forgot...
I would like to see some proof Hamilton was favorited.

All you have done up to this point is talk the talk but not once have you walked the walked.

Provide evidence! If you can´t then you might as well say the tooth fairy tweaked on Alonso´s car in Parc Fermé.
It has the exact same weight to it.

 

[Ejike Wodu]

I think that has been the longest battle I've read between two members of RD.

Some very interesting points from both sides.

One thing I have to say is that The Flying Lap episode 85 posted by Hampus talks about Alonso somewhere around the 30 minute mark.

It explains why he needs a weak team mate and that he more than most needs the number 1 status. The link is under that thread about this weekends Japanese grand prix.