Chance of German GP happening ’50-50′ – Lauda

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Niki Lauda believed there is as good a chance the German Grand Prix will be cancelled as there is it will go ahead.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Lauda neutral on chances of German GP happening (Reuters)

"It is bad for Germany, bad for Mercedes, bad for everybody if the organisers cannot get it going. If I had to bet, 50-50 only, I think."

150 Millionen fur Hamilton? Fur Toto Wolff 'absolute Illusion' (Motorsport Total, German)

Toto Wolff dismissed claims Lewis Hamilton is seeking a £150 million deal to remain at Mercedes for the next three years.

Vettel on Alonso: “I couldn’t see how the accident started…” (Adam Cooper's F1 Blog)

"I only saw the last bit where he was hitting the wall. But what happened before, I don’t know, I can’t judge whether he lost the car with the wind or not."

Alonso was travelling at 134mph before crash (BBC)

"Data seen by teams indicates the Spaniard attempted the Barcelona track's Turn Three faster than on his previous lap, which was his fastest of the day."

Einschlag mit 105 km/h (Auto Motor und Sport, German)

Auto Motor und Sport reports Alonso hit the wall at 105kph

Nico still not happy with W06 (Sky)

"Today was a difficult day because even though all the numbers looked like they were in the right place in the set up, the set up was actually very, very far away from where it needed to be and we don’t really understand that."

Red Bull RB11 - New rear suspension uprights (F1)

"Suspension arms and their attachments to the upright are becoming more and more integral to an F1 car's aero package, and nowhere is this more evident than on Red Bull's new RB11."

Episode 6 – The team prepares for testing times (YouTube)

Fernando Alonso thanks for your support (YouTube)


Comment of the day

As Manor take another step towards gaining a place on the grid this year, here’s why @Colossal-Squid wants them to make it:

One of the most important benefits back marker teams bring to the sport is allowing young talent to hone their craft, develop as drivers and make a name for themselves.

These teams can hold the same function for other areas such as mechanics, designers and other talent that is vital to keeping the sport healthy. The next Adrian Newey or Fernando Alonso may get their start in Manor or other small teams where otherwise they might never get a chance.

Small teams have so many hidden benefits to give to the sport as a whole, it’s a shame more isn’t being done to ensure that Manor are given as much help or leeway as possible to be able to enter F1 this season.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Bastardo, Kevin and Lame2741!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Happy 75th birthday to 1978 world champion, 1969 Indianapolis 500 winner and four-times IndyCar champion Mario Andretti.

Author information

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

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

51 comments on “Chance of German GP happening ’50-50′ – Lauda”

  1. Soooooo… That was a badly setup Mercedes?

    Everyone else is screwed.

    1. Not necessarily, from what I gather the adjustments they are making to set-up aren’t having the intended consequences. Not necessarily that the set-up itself was bad, but that the set-up changes required to get to that set-up were unexpected.

    2. @losd Hahaha. Yeahhhh.

  2. Regarding the Alonso crash: I think if anything rather than hounding McLaren the media should be calling for pre-season testing to be televised (or better yet, webcasted! Let’s take a step in that direction FOM! It’s long overdue). There’s only so much F1 that happens in a year, and obviously there’s a lot of interest surrounding these tests.

    The circus this accident has generated due to being unseen is appalling and lowers the overall standard of motor-racing journalism.

    1. Maybe not televised, but if the FOM had a YouTube account they could steam on that, then it’s not as expensive for us (and for them) and it gets more people more excited for the new season.

      1. Sounds a bit appalling to me to be wanting to see an accident. How would that matter or help anything and I think the sentiment only adds to the circus. Why can’t people just accept it as a normal thing, especially in testing, and move on? How would seeing the accident make for less circus, and raise journalism standards?

        1. @robbie I don’t think it’s just to witness accidents (and since Alonso is “uninjured” it’s not even ghoulish), though it would answer a lot of question about how it happened, and the Wolff/Nasr incident.

          In general though, a good number of F1 fans would like to watch the teams test. Testing and development is as much of the formula as are the race weekends. More so than pretty much any other series.

  3. ok, so maybe nothing failed on the McLaren/Honda ,

    Did Fred step over the edge of its grip ?

    Does Fondmetal have anything to do with its aero development :)

    1. his name is Fernando.

      1. Frednando Teflonso

      2. OmarR-Pepper (@)
        28th February 2015, 21:42

        @jerseyf1 @oskar Ferdinand would be the most accurate translation, Fred is from Frederick, and he isn’t Federico Alonso

  4. As for the Alonso crash in the McLaren, it is perfectly possible that the Honda PU has really bad drivability, like the Ferrari last year, so maybe when Alonso hit the accelerator pedal at 134mph, the car stepped out on him.

  5. One thing I don’t understand about this mystery surrounding Alonso’s crash. Why aren’t the teams always running their on-board cameras, at least for themselves. I mean, I can’t imagine it would be a problem for them to record it, especially since drivers could probably learn by rewatching their own laps and spotting perhaps some areas for improvement. And honestly, even if there is nothing driver can learn, why not just running it in case you need it once in a while. It’s already on the car. Just record it. Some things about F1 really boggle the mind.

    1. I don’t think the cars are equipped with the regular cameras during testing because those are handled exclusively by FOM, but the teams can certainly put a GoPro or similar camera onboard for reviews, not live feeds. We know they do this already with infrared for temperatures so yeah, it’s not that hard.

      But would they release the footage to the public? that’s highly unlikely anyway.

  6. Why isn’t anyone talking about what look like pipes going down the side of the Honda? Is that what I see?

  7. I don’t quite get how both possible locations’ organisers not being able to afford the German GP this year, after they already had to share the slot due to the race losing them lots of money, is their fault, rather than an indicator for F1’s price still being over inflated for the current market. If loss is costly for Mercedes, why not add sufficient funds.

  8. I really enjoyed that UBS video
    Got goose bumps

    Maybe it was just the fine Matilda Bay Ale in my belly :)
    but I cannot wait till i see these cars run angry ,
    Also makes me want to put my $80 life savings into UBS and save for a Rolex ,

  9. I’ve not seen anyone else as bland as Fernando Alonso.

  10. That Alonso video made me cringe

    1. Don’t understand why someone would cringe watching that video … You expected him to dance or something?

  11. COTD, one of the best ever, in my job, I started in a very unglamorous way at the bottom learning my craft, those early years served me for the next 30 !
    And every so often a gem of a driver can show their talent when the conditions allow, think Vettel in a Torro Rosso in the wet. Webber in a Minardi.

  12. Vargo Spots Things What You Cannot Wot
    28th February 2015, 7:59

    The spotlighted commenter up the top is making pleasant-sounding noises, but it’s like singing into the wind. He’s not grasped the effect of the conditions under which all teams now operate, let alone back markers. Obviously, more seats mean more drivers, but after we’ve acknowledged that truism, the important questions still remain.

    The burning question is: Why has Adrian Newey gone? The answer, to some, would be a statement of the bleeding obvious, but not to all.

    Adrian Newey is gone for a reason that is more significant than a phase of life and a new personal horizon, it’s a harbinger of something potentially fatal for the sport that he once loved, and, just like him, the future Adrians are not dreaming of twiddling their thumbs at the back of the grid with evermore restrictions on any form of technical input apart from micron adjustments of winglet designs. Even the winglets are winging their way out of the hands of the engineers to be homologated in a template that all teams must apply.

    Nobody with his blinkers off is dreaming of clambering aboard a sinking ship only to be straitjacketed at any rung of the grid, top or bottom. In other words, F1 does not attract the best minds anymore. Why would it? What can their minds offer and be offered? Be definition, the best, at their best, would despair of the sport and run a mile in the opposite direction to which it’s going.

    Maybe they’ll run to Le Mans, ALMS, KLMS, WEC, KCMG, KPMG, AM or PM. Don’t be fooled by Rory Byrne’s return. Ferrari’s need for speed will require a few months of tinkering by a renowned Tefal Head, but that investment is not for passion or posterity, it’s a project of pure practicality.

    If we are incredibly lucky, Newey will, for the moment, be driven by the challenge of campaigning from his new vantage point to channel and trammel these wayward forces in F1. If he succeeds, he will have rebuilt his home on a mountain that is, as we speak, being levelled of its peaks. Then, naturally, he may return.

    1. Vargo Spots Things What You Cannot Wot
      28th February 2015, 8:01

      By definition, sorry.

      1. Sorry !!
        For what ?
        Speak out .
        And register
        Then speak out again ,
        I can’t conjur such posts so am relying on you folks that can

        There are a few golden spots available (aero Chiefs) and people are making some bank then retiring to fishing or building empires elsewhere .

        There will be more pain this year for the non strategy group teams

        If we lose 1 manufacturer or heaven forbid ” red bull” ( 4 cars)
        F1 won’t even make the grid next Melbourne ( 2016)

        1. And I don’t mean speaking out against @colossal-squid
          Which by the way was a worthy COTD,

          I was referring to the regs

          1. @greg-c No worries! I agree, if we can get more innovation into the sport without costs spiralling out of control it’d be great for F1.

    2. I don’t see how my point is invalidated by anything you’ve written. I think they’re separate issues.

      You’re absolutely right, the regulations need to be more free in order to encourage innovation and attract the best minds to F1. I’ve commented about this issue before here on F1Fanatic. However, how does your argument mean that I haven’t grasped such a reality? My main point was that more teams on the grid affords greater opportunities to a wealth of people in different positions to get into F1. This is true regardless of the regulations. More teams means more people working in the sport, and therefore more chances for talent to enter. Whether they do or not is an entirely separate issue.

      Even if the regulations became less restrictive these same people who would then be attracted to the sport as you suggest would struggle to get into the highly competitive environment of F1 with the tiny amount of teams we have now.

      Your argument doesn’t undermine or negate mine, they’re both necessary to improving the sport and fostering the next generation of talent. Remember that Adrian Newey got his start in the minnow team of Leyton House in the 80’s. For all the freedom in designing the car Newey had back then, if there were only 9 teams on the grid it’s far less likely that Newey would have been able to make a career in F1.

      1. Consider two futures:

        A. 22 cars, all running with identical tubs, engines and tyres, with uniform wings, springs and set-ups, and chassis adjustments agreed in the morning of the race or qualifying by committee.

        B. F1 dead because every single egghead and all money on Earth evaporated and the grid dwindled to a single car made by the last genius to utilise the last pot of funding before he expired, run by a garage full of Kwik-Fit Fitters.

        One of those is on the verge of becoming manifest. One of those, I’d suggest, is impossible.

        Nevertheless, I’d take B over A, and hope F1 went away. The Phoenix Principle (to coin a phrase) would then apply for as long as it took for humanity to develop maths, physics, creativity, the atavistic desire to compete ferociously, and money again.

        My point is that, although, as I said, it’s true that more cars and teams mean more people driving and working in the teams, this axiom is missing, and diverting attention from, the crucial point, and, in fact, degrading the chance of a solution by accepting the status quo.

        If a ship is sinking, although it’s well-observed that the food is falling off the tables, dolloping more food on people’s plates is not going to alleviate the central crisis.

        1. Your arguments are implausible and to my mind ridiculous. If your argument cannot be made unless you resort to over the top fantasies, with no basis in proof or fact then I can’t take you seriously. Your axiom is flawed as it’s grounded on far too many assumptions (a one-spec sport is ‘on the verge’ of happening? when? how? wouldn’t every manufacturer object and therefore it wouldn’t happen?).

          You present a classic false dichotomy, with neither example given even remotely likely in the near to medium term future and you have absolutely no credible argument either would ever come to pass.

          The axiom you speak of was missing from my original comment because as I’ve pointed out it’s so flawed and illogical as to have been completely beyond my consideration. Furthermore my comment did not need to refer to every issue that may be considered tangentially connected to it in order for it to be valid. Just because I didn’t refer to the separate issue of restrictive regulations does not mean I was ‘diverting attention’ from that issue, when such an issue was not material or relevant to the context in which I made my original comment. If everyone had to consider every possible permutation and implication of their comments and then address such concerns then every comment made on this site would be the length of your average college dissertation. That’s a ridiculous notion.

          Finally I reject your point that the ‘ship is sinking’. F1 is, as it has always been, beset by issues. However these issues don’t immediately threaten the sport’s future and even if they did I imagine that spiralling costs, dropping viewing figures, lack of new team entries, inept rule changes unrelated to car development – such as double points, driver helmet designs, standing starts – lack of sponsors, failure to promote the sport online or with any internet presence, the F1 Strategy Group politics, Bernie Ecclestone’s myriad failures, an ageing fanbase, boring tracks, high ticket prices,inequitable revenue distribution, high cost of new teams entering the sport and so on are all more immediate concerns than restrictive regulations. As the restrictive regulations are not the only problem with the sport and are not even its biggest problem your entire argument is undermined. Freeing up the regulations is not a cure all.

          1. Comprehension Deficit
            28th February 2015, 14:01

            Unfortunately, in the same way that you’ve failed to apprehend, or at least overlooked, the problem at the core of F1 at the moment, you’ve failed to understand most of what I’ve written.

            The axiom is the truism is the statement of the blooming obvious. All three refer to your observation that more cars provide more seats for more drivers, and more garages employ more mechanics and pen-pushers, et cetera.

            When your comments are analysed, dismantled a little and then another comment is added taking things hither and thither argumentatively, you mustn’t take it personally.

            Remember, it’s not an attack on you. In this instance, it’s a reminder of what you’ve forgotten.

          2. The axiom is the truism is the statement of the blooming obvious

            Then explain your point to me in plain English so that I may gaze upon your superior intellect.

    3. Whilst Newey has cut back his involvement in F1, it is not exactly something that is unexpected – he has had a huge passion for sailing and been trying to get involved with the Americas Cup since the mid 2000’s – he’s been trying to get into the world of sailing since his days at McLaren.

      Furthermore, you could argue that there is also a financial incentive for Red Bull to allow Newey to work on an Americas Cup team. I believe that Red Bull also intend to provide sponsorship to Ainslie’s bid for the Americas Cup – if Newey is able to improve the competitiveness of the team and therefore increase their chances of success, it potentially improves the return on investment for Red Bull’s outlay on sponsorship.

      It is also worth noting that Newey has often complained in the past whenever he feels that engines are given too much precedence – for example, he complained in the mid 2000’s when they switched to the V8 engine format, for example, only to then claim that he was “reinvigorated” a few years later once the FIA introduced the engine freeze a few years later that gave much greater precedence to aerodynamics.
      Given that it is in his interests for F1 to be an aero dominated formula, of course he will complain when the sport moves towards a more engine biased formula – because that is an area he cannot influence in the way he can influence aero rules (see how Red Bull used their and Toro Rosso’s voting rights to block restrictions on aero development in the past).

      Equally, I don’t think that many engineers are running from F1 to Le Mans – some have moved as part of the natural exchange of engineers between the two series, but some, such as James Key, have rebuffed serious attempts by the manufacturer teams in sportscar racing to hire them (Porsche reportedly targeted Key, only for him to reject them and to go to Toro Rosso instead).

      1. @colossal-squid No question the smaller teams are a great avenue for up and coming drivers as well as men and women involved in every other aspect of F1. My only issue surrounds how much of a helping hand, or how much hand-holding should go on in an entity which is supposed to be the pinnacle of racing? These teams all had to sell F1 on why the should be allowed to enter F1…had to show at least on paper a strong case for their own sustainability. Yes of course they get curve balls thrown at them when things like new more expensive PU’s come in…yes revenue sharing could be better…and yes it’s a weak globally economy we’re in right now…ultimately though I don’t like seeing teams coming in having said they would be sustainable only to end up with their hands out. Where does that end? They entered to go racing and to glean benefit from marketing their brand(s) globally.

        As to the scaring away of all the good talent that might potentially come to a watered down F1…sure I can see that somewhat, but I think the argument is being exaggerated a great deal by using Newey as an example. Let’s not forget the lengthy career and huge success he has already enjoyed. It should be no surprise he would want to look for other challenges. He was even thinking of it a decade or more ago so it’s not entirely about the current state of F1. He’s been there, done that, and got the T-shirt. So many other Neweys are waiting in the wings that would love a crack at any version of F1 that happens to be the F1 of the day. They don’t know from what Newey can draw from in terms of the way it used to be, which was obviously not sustainable anyway.

        1. @robbie

          My only issue surrounds how much of a helping hand, or how much hand-holding should go on in an entity which is supposed to be the pinnacle of racing?

          Ideally, none. Ultimately I completely agree with you, we can’t have teams coming in indefinitely with their hands out in order to stay in the sport. That’s not what the pinnacle of motor racing should be about. My view on this is in the very short term. I justify giving Manor leeway because I want more teams in the sport now. But if they’re still being propped up in a few seasons from now that’s clearly not the answer either.

          I guess it’s symptomatic of how broken F1 governance is that even midfield teams at the moment are struggling for finance. As you pointed out expensive development, global economic troubles and an unfair distribution of revenue are all factors in this. The need for handouts won’t end until at least some of these issues are fixed. How does F1 go about doing so? I honestly have no idea.

  13. I believe the interest in this year’s testing demonstrates the need for it to be televised. Here F1 could look to the NFL’s coverage of its combine event for how to generate interest in the upcoming season. Viewing figures for this are huge for what is essentially a large number of men working out.

    Not only should there be coverage of what is happening on track, but better media access to the drivers and team personnel too.

    However, I feel due to F1’s outdated business model this will not happen as FOM relies on outside broadcasters to deliver coverage despite operating most of what is needed to deliver a F1 network itself. A F1 network could be packaged with cable/satellite subscriptions or more conveniently and forward looking delivered via the Internet.

    I believe this will need more progressive management than the current F1 leadership is willing or capable of so it will take some time yet!

    1. You Know When Vargo A-Say-Say, Then You Hush Or-Go-Go Away
      28th February 2015, 10:39

      Any interest in testing shown on F1 Fanatic’s Live stream appears to be the property of a generously fixated forum member who has a supernatural and beguiling ability to list lap times selflessly for the edification of the enthralled onlooker. If anyone insults these important updates by adding a comment to interrupt the tide of important data about tyre compounds with something utterly irrelevant that they, obtusely, feel like saying, they may be banned by F1 Fanatic, and rightly so. First, check with an authority that your brain-burp is acceptable. Please do not start writing things about the day’s testing or motorsport that you selfishly think are vaguely of interest and might engender a response that would be of further interest. Ask yourself if you really are the one to judge whether or not what you want to say is worth saying at all.

      I’m sure we’re all thankful that F1 Fanatic polices its content properly so that, eventually, its Live testing stream will be a monologue of graciously self-referential statements about the ability of the aforementioned pundit to notice things that only he and other hyper-alert oracles could possibly notice. Plus lap times, obviously.

      If you don’t already know the rules, I beg you to spend as much time as possible learning the rules, as is your obligation, especially since the rules are arbitrarily created and enforced in reaction to any opinion, observation or sentence that interrupts the outflowing of consciousness of the aforesaid infinitely-knowledgeable-Ceefax.

      I hope this has been helpful to members, in pursuance of preventing next year’s Live testing commentary from being assaulted with various forms of egregious thought-typing and point-making at variance to the tyres-and-timings topics prescribed by our in-house experts.

      1. I think you got lost, you’re looking for

        1. Yes. After writing whatever it is I just wrote, I’d ban me if I were me.

    2. Covering testing has been looked at before & ultimately judged not worth it from a cost perspective due to how few viewers it would probably get.

      Sky put together live coverage of all 4 days of the final Barcelona test in 2013 & there coverage got significantly less viewers than there coverage of the official practice sessions do. It cost them a fortune to produce the coverage of that test & the low number of viewers they got is what’s put a stop to them producing more live testing coverage in 2014/2015.

      It must also be remembered that testing isn’t like the official practice sessions. There isn’t constant action, There’s not always several cars on track doing fast laps so there’s not always track action you can focus your cameras on & with pit access heavily restricted by teams trying to hide there new developments you can’t just go & show footage from the garages as you can during practice.
      During testing you can go an hour or more where all you see is the odd car come out the garage & drive around slowly doing in/out laps on constant speed runs to test aero & during that time there may not be any other cars out doing proper runs to watch.

      1. Sounds perfect for the FOM to livestream via YouTube.

        1. Contracts FOM have with broadcasters would prevent that.
          Same reason your unlikely to see any other sorts of live streams on the f1 website, The broadcasters buy exclusivity rights to live F1 content in there respective regions.

          Plus it comes back to the same problem Sky had in 2013, It would cost FOM a fortune to produce the broadcast of the test & there would be very little gain to justify the cost of producing it.

          There’s actually nothing stopping any of the broadcasters from putting together live coverage, As I said Sky trialed it in 2013 & didn’t get the sort of viewers they needed to justify the cost & other broadcasters who have looked at trying live coverage have found the same.

          As I said in my initial post, The biggest problem is that in testing not a lot happens & because of that your not going to get the viewer numbers needed to justify the cost’s involved in putting together the broadcast.

          Sky went into that 2013 test with plans of doing it every year, The relative lack of interest & low viewer numbers (In the UK & Italy) put them & other broadcasters who were looking at live coverage off doing it again.

  14. What’s it with the ‘M’s being at the back? Manor, Marussia, Midland, Minardi etc. Maybe that’s why they are called Minnows? May we see a Minnows F1 team soon?

    1. Maybe that’s why McLaren is struggling

  15. It’s great for the sport that Manor will (probably) be able to participate this season but if they can’t start making the needed progress, I’d rather seem the gone IMO. Still it’s fantastic that they can make it and I do hope that they can start fighting for points.

  16. The genius/politics of Alonso into play …
    Don’t like the car, regrets his decision, crashes the car out of frustration (as he got an idea where he would be by the end of season and where Vettel , Kimi, Massa, Bottas, Groj, all merc guy would be) . So, creating excuse baseline (i.e. his accident) even before the season started, and also got media attention.
    Alonso’s championship hopes / chances washed away by Ron Dennis & McLaren again! What improvements did RB Aero guys brought in McLaren? Nothing?!
    McLaren has now Wiilliams past low years struggle. I was very firm in my opionion that Alonso to McLaren was a bad idea, and I still hold by that. Even a move to Lotus would’ve been even better.
    Poor Alonso, Talent wasted with Just 2championships with bad luck of being in wrong car at wrong time. I guess he should now retire and go to WEC or something. His “projects” will fail – McLaren, Ferrari & McLaren again. It’s all his decisions, part of it is him to blame, part the constructors not giving him with good machine.

    Ha!, I bet even Kimi will get another WDC before Alonso gets another. [Kimi ‘coz he won his first later than Alonso].

    Good luck Alonso, I’ve enjoyed years you’ve raced in F1, now I guess it’s time to support so many exciting and energetic new/young/upcoming drivers & oh yeah, Kimi [the flying finn] again :]

    1. @functor
      What a low comment. To exaggerate facts and to twist them to suit a point of view is one thing, to make a completely baseless claim with only the intention to smear is quite unacceptable. To infer Alonso’s crash was in any way deliberate so that he can cover his back is both callous and defamatory. I doubt I will be able to change your opinion, of which you are clearly entrenched, but I will point out that there is a great difference between holding a view and wildly speculating on matters of which you can not claim to be informed.

      But, what is most alarming, is that you are writing a comment as if in hindsight of events which are yet to take place. “Create an excuse baseline” – for what reason and to protect him from whom exactly? Fernando Alonso has proven himself to be widely regarded as a top 3 F1 driver for over a decade. Give me a list of other drivers who are in that category and it shows he is in the undisputed pantheon of greats. Stating he does not like the car and that he regrets his decision has no basis whatsoever. Where is even an inference of this in any published text? You then go on to suggest that McLaren’s aero package is a failure when not a single lap focusing on it has been completed at anywhere near full power. That is a notion which is so easily understood at a moment’s contemplation.

      As for McLaren being compared to Williams that is, at best, outrageously premature. Williams didn’t win a race between Brazil 2004 and a one-off Spain 2013. Nearly a full decade and have won nothing since. How can it be argued that a team that was fighting for the championship in 2012 and won 7 races that year are comparable to a team that last won 7 races or more in 1997?

      I appreciate that you are a Raikkonen fan who was sorely disappointed at the battle between the two great drivers at Ferrari last year but to simply create utter lies to sully a champion’s reputation is quite another.

      1. @rbalonso
        Why do you wanna waste your time? @functor s comment doesn’t deserve a reply..the comment’s just plain sick

  17. Money is certainly a big part of a driver’s contract, but there is so much more to it that we can’t even imagine.

    I remember reading a cooy of Ayrton Senna’s old contract (signed at least 25 years ago), and it already had many clauses. Just image nowadays.

    1. for a guy like Ham pay check is everything, this was main reason why he step of Mclaren, they offer a salary cut. Can’t blame him to ask but if wining counts then Vettel have many more, besides running the mercedes guarantees a chance to win, mercedes will won with any of it’s drivers, so no need to pay more…

  18. People are adding 2 and X together and getting 5. McLaren are telling us X =2 and we should be getting 4, but people can’t help but think given Alonso’s political game playing history, the current state of McLaren Honda’s F1 program and the descriptions if the accident, maybe X is slightly more than 2.

    Until Alonso is sat in that car on the Melbourne grid, probably in 5th we’re all going to think there is more to the story than is being published.

  19. Did you see this interview (youtube) with Karun Chandhok about his racing career @keithcollantine? Its quite thorough (almost 45 minutes) and gives some really interesting insights and lookout on things.

Comments are closed.