Was it McLaren or was it Bridgestone?!

[Knock-on]

McLaren said that there will be no tyre issues in Monaco. So the whole argument is pretty pointless - McLaren has probably fixed their car, so now probably Hamilton will be able to drive as he likes. If he can't, well, one driver's problem is his own, not of the whole sport.
Although I know that some people believe that cranes are acceptable when the Golden boy "must" win...

Well, the whole arguement is pretty pointless now and let's hope that it never happens again and Bridgestone get their house in order. I really find it unpalatable that people consider something as fundemental as tyre failure and driver wellbeing so lightly but perhaps that's a reflection on them and their values

As for the crane example, it was later proven, after much wrangleing, that he shouldn't have been assisted but as he didn't score any points, it really is a moot point. Crying over spilt milk springs to mind but had he have scored a point, I'm sure he would not have been allowed to keep it.

Lets hope for a nice, controvacy free Monoco (some hope )

[Garry Walker]

As is saying Hamilton "is struggling with his team mate in a way Schumacher or Senna for example never did". For one thing being outqualified twice in the first 5 races of the season happened to Senna in 1985 (also his second season).

LH has been outqualified 3 times fuel accounted for (which we have to count these days, anything else is irrelevant), one we have no data on, and the last one is suspicious (australia).
Senna was outqualified throughout the year 3 times in 1985, let`s see if LH manages to equal that.
Not to mention HK is outqualifying LH in LHs team, where he is the rookie.
Senna went to De Angelis`team, who managed to easily beat Mansell the year before.
Schumacher was much faster than Piquet from day 1 on.

As for the "hype", well referring to him as "Goldie Locks" just adds to it.

It`s a funny name (to me) and I will keep using it when I see fit.

As for Windsor, well his is just another opinion, and we all have one

Unfortunately my opinion or your opinion is not published for millions of people, even though we both have a much higher understanding of F1 than that idiot. Although, I have to admit, neither of us knows as much about 563th phase turn in as Petey does.

Now having identified that weakness, isn't it down to Bridgestone to find the cause and fix it? Or should they ignore it?

Only McLaren has that problem, so BS shouldn`t put other teams at a disadvantage to help McLaren when they aren`t capable of doing their job (designing and setting up the car) properly.

If my driving style was compromised by admitted and proven flawed tyre construction............

McLaren could have compromised on their setups to make the tyre last, and HK didn`t have problems anyway.
So the problem lies with Goldie Locks and his inability to take care of the tyres properly.
Even the most durable of things can get broken if used improperly. Which is what Hamilton did.

[ShiftingGears]

Hamilton was excellent but if he wants to retain that driving style through the increasingly rare fast sweeping corners in F1, then McLaren need to get a car that's lighter on its tyres. Or a setup more conservative on tyres.

[ArrowsFA1]

I have to admit, neither of us knows as much about 563th phase turn in as Petey does.

I guess Hamilton's problem may be caused by the 391st phase

McLaren could have compromised on their setups to make the tyre last.

To be fair that's exactly what they did. According to Martin Whitmarsh, Hamilton "changed his style and driving line" through turn 8, and the team "took a number of measures with Bridgestone, we came here running the pressures and the camber that they specified and we then increased the pressures on Saturday morning hoping that would solve the problem and Bridgestone were very confident that would solve it. It didn't sufficiently to give us the comfort we needed so we made some other adjustments and limited the range in the race."

[SGWilko]

Even the most durable of things can get broken if used improperly. Which is what Hamilton did.

Is that your opinion, or are you stating fact? Could you provide us with your source for this please, as I am intrigued you have an insight into all matters black, round and sticky.....

[SGWilko]

Hamilton was excellent but if he wants to retain that driving style through the increasingly rare fast sweeping corners in F1, then McLaren need to get a car that's lighter on its tyres. Or a setup more conservative on tyres.

An interesting point. Consider however that in 2007, the McLaren had a habit of being harsh on its rears. One would assume thay have adressed this with changes to aero, CofG and weight distribution alterations.

Remember, Lewis's failure in Turkey 2007 was attributed to a construction issue, not caused by wear. No amount of setup changes can magically remedy a construction fault...

And Bridgestone have openly admitted that the same symptoms were displayed in Turkey 2008, only on Lewis's car. I still don't think this is the fault of Lewis or the team, certainly not if he was not wearing the tyres any more than the rest of the field.

[ShiftingGears]

An interesting point. Consider however that in 2007, the McLaren had a habit of being harsh on its rears.

I never noticed that problem with Alonso. I thought that was more to do with Hamilton liking an oversteering car which wears the rear tyres moreso than a smoother style.

[Tallgeese]

To be honest the 3-stoppers worked quite well, but could probably have been optimised & executed somewhat more aggressively than it was. I think that if Hamilton had pushed much sooner on Massa (& it was clear that he could have) that we'd be saying very different things about the Turkish GP result would have been different.