Four hours after the race, direct from the paddock in Monza, a full colour 78-page e-magazine, telling you the inside stories of the Italian Grand Prix. GP+ e-magazine is the fastest way to get the inside line after an F1 race. In this week’s issue we bring you all the latest stories from Monza, analysing Lewis Hamilton’s great victory.
We look at Alex Zanardi’s amazing story from F1 to Olympic gold…
We look at F1 and the cinema…
We get an insight about life at the wrong end of the grid…
Plus all our usual insights and columns, plus the great photography of Peter Nygaard and his team.
It is delivered electronically, no matter where you are in the world.
It fits a computer screen – and looks great on an iPad.
For more information about this extraordinary product, go to www.grandprixplus.com
Thank you for this week’s ‘On the Grid’ – glorious.
Hi Joe,
How do you feel about the chances of RBR/Lotus challenging for wins now that the circus is leaving Europe?
Seb/Kimster still able to challenge for the WDC?
The World Championship is still open.
A good result to churn the WDC, and keep us all interested.
Another moral victory for Alonso.
Note to Red Bull: It’s happened in other hot races, so it was predictable. Renault alternators wilt and die in the heat, so get busy drilling the bodywork and make a venturi to keep them cooler.
I’ve seen Monza described somewhere as the “only F1 race in a Royal Park”, but surely Prince Albert’s Park in Melbourne counts, or have those Aussies finally revolted?
Did Monza charge journalists extra for internet access again Joe?
There is no such thing as a moral victory in F1. You either win or you don’t win and no-one cares about the losers. It was a brilliant drive from Hamilton and I find it utterly extraordinary that you can describe it as you have.
Albert Park is not a royal park and never has been.
Monza charged us more than other tracks do. And it was not very good. Plus ca change.
I have never heard of any talk of “moral victories” in F1 either. But I confess to being very chuffed, considering all the media flack Lewis took recently, which should rightly be drowned out by his revving race car on a push lap.
On another count, I find it disconcerting so many see drivers as anything but regular guys.
They are normal people who decided to go for it in their life, and 99% of whom I have witnessed from afar, obviously knew just what that meant: personal sacrifice, intense absence, loneliness when surrounded, loss of some kinds of privacy, and it all.
This is no different from musicians I knew who strove to make it to a conservatory, yet even barely teens knew that was one really not soft option. Oh, they already knew . . Immense talent in that field rarely breaks the headlines in even the specialist press in classical music (maybe because that is a lot publication sector compared with not too long ago) but try again with a talented rock guitarist. I met too many who couldn’t get to show their abilities.
It is *known*, to all, I think, you are not given great odds in life. There’s always been too many of us! Whosoever makes it from a inevitably select few (neither in music nor in racing nor any sport, is there much room at the top) is a winner.
Maybe I am just weird, that I can take joy in a great performance, and not care who delivers.
I don’t really think I am alone.
Most distinctly, I recall my late biz partner being asked to manage a winner of the Tchaikovsky prize, as good as it gets in pianoforte. Obstacles to overcome (more than a decade ago, but I forget), huge promotion costs, the labels wanted paying guarantees also so studio costs plus, and a multi year wait for a concert hall. Okay. So talent but it looked like a million / yr before anyone got paid anything or even a record was made. Anyhow, F1 is not alone in extraordinary demands on performers.
I won’t recall, because he passed far too young, a viola player who made it at a scary tender age to the Lon Phil. Because he made it, and he was my friend.
Do these people go for “moral victories”?
Or do they want to perform, and entertain?
Show me one driver, who woke up one day and exclaimed “Holy Cow, I’m a F1 driver and this is too much for me.”
My bedazzlement is reserved for who thinks it is not a normal thing to have a ambition from a young age. You never had a dream, ever? So dreams so often start at a late age? (that would be a good article to explore somewhere else)
Is this a hangover from some days or rule bending past?
Or is it just a affinity to not enjoying who wins?
I’ve given up favourites in this sport, just love to watch a great drive. Such was delivered. Customer satisfied (excepting the being at home and not at track).
So who throws stones at what they wanted, but who has neither gift, nor stamina nor perseverance, well they smash only the remaining panes of the broken glass houses of their own pathetically forgotten hopes, the earlier cracked panes arising from tantrum not application.
I’ve studied this – amateurishly – in sales. Is the, and I shall loosely reuse your words “moral victory” a empathy for failure? I spent much of this year thinking and hoping Schumi could pull one off. Would be cool, but amount to nothing. It feels good to support the underdog. But it never take away the win, and that is what is impressive, rarely who tails behind. I care for the back markers to see who will deliver next year, or who is overlooked, or whose management is not to the task. The real sport, not this commentator on a blog, cares for that also.
I mean this because I recognise there is comfort in empathy for who never quite makes it. Jean Alesi fan to this day.. But did I get upset someone else won? Nope.
You could summarise all I said above as “it’s a race, see the results”.
I also believe that Lewis is outgrowing himself in ways difficult to divine, and of enough variety not to settle all at once. It’s maybe not about management, or long distance love, but about how he is finding his private way to respond. I’m a fan of this – growing – man, who won this weekend. But if MW or whoever, or because Peter S is long deserving more results, Perez, takes the next, I will not be dulled. I’ll still say the TV coverage sucks rocks, mind you . .
Someone else can deal with the changes to Monza. I can never tell if I am fascinated or disappointed or what, there have been so many alterations and tweaks. Maybe it could be time-lined in a specialist book one day.
yours,
~ joj
“Holy Cow, I’m a F1 driver and this is too much for me.”
I’d love a dose of whatever you’re on mate
I’d personally want some of what F1 drivers are – naturally – on
What I was on, though, was a half bottle of really nice Sauternes, and a heady enjoyment of LH’s drive, which made me trip a bit because of all the trash talk that had made me choke before as unfair on the guy..
Being high on someone else’s success is however, for me, the best trip by far. Why I watch something I could not do myself.
Maybe because it’s unadulterated. Sometimes when it’s your own work, you feel just a little entitled. I get high on watching a great performance. The glass of sweet wine was simply bonus, as I sat back and enjoyed!
The only time I hear of a “moral victory” in relation to F1, it’s coming from the mouth of the person (or supporter of the person) who lost an argument/challenge/race/etc.
To give an example that comes to mind, Damon Hill was the moral victor of the 1994 World Championship.
Colin, please explain why all of Renault’s alternators didn’t blow up? Or at least both of Red Bull’s? If it was as simple to resolve as you appear to believe, it would have probably been solved before Valencia. (Not to mention any potential knock-on effects drilling bodywork or venturis would cause to the aero package, cooling of other areas of the car, fuel consumption…you get the picture)
JoeQ/
There is no such thing as a moral victory in F1. You either win or you don’t win and no-one cares about the losers. It was a brilliant drive from Hamilton and I find it utterly extraordinary that you can describe it as you have.
Albert Park is not a royal park and never has been.
/JoeQ
There have been many moral victories in F1, as you well know. The most obvious being Damon Hill, who most count as a double WDC. No matter what the record books show.
I’m as thrilled as you that Lewis won, but it was clearly a moral victory for Alonso.
Had his anti-roll bar not snapped, he would have been at the sharp end of the grid, and certainly fought for, if not won the race.
Ergo, a moral victory for Fernando.
He’ll be well chuffed with his drive, and know in himself, he would have won if not for the mishap beyond his control.
Ask him how his morale is after Monza, and look in his eyes.
Queen Victoria’s Prince Consort has a park named after him, and it isn’t a Royal Park? What a snub! Perhaps it was named in honour of Albert Steptoe?
Brilliant. I wrote my reply above prior to reading this comment about Damon Hill. I chose well
Not even Damon Hill counts himself as a double world champion (moral or otherwise).
Damon would, of course, be the last person to publicly claim to be moral victor of the WDC stolen by the illegal Benetton. To expect him to do so, evidences a poor judge of character.
Responsible pundits and historians certainly credit Hill with the moral victory.
Red Bull relied on Renault, who, in-turn, relied on Martelli to fix their chocolate alternators.
Consequently, and naturally, they melted again, when heat-stressed.
Whereas, an in-house direct fix involving belt and braces, would have secured the squandered points.
You can be sure they’ve learned the lesson.
Colin, from Autosport – http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/102454
So basically, Renault are saying it’s not a heat-specific problem (heat is a symptom, not a cause). By that, I mean that throwing air/water at the problem is unlikely the solution but rather they need to stop internal heat build-up at low RPM. As I mentioned earlier, if it was as simple as you are suggesting, it would have been fixed already. F1 suppliers generally aren’t rubbish and Magneti Marelli supply various items to numerous teams.
—
As for “responsible pundits and historians,” I shall quote a Mr Joe Saward (you may have heard of him) – “There is no such thing as a moral victory in F1. You either win or you don’t win and no-one cares about the losers.”
Thank you for the link on the Italian chocolate alternators.
The further links from those pages show Renault and Martelli are completely stumped, and must find a fix for Sg.
Their longer stator and capacity modifications proved (by also failing) they are on the wrong tack.
I suspect it +IS+ a simple matter of heat build-up, and the fix is equally simple.
This is no time to be so precious about cutting holes in the bodywork.
They are faffing.
Really embarrassing for all concerned.
We will follow with interest.
Re: Moral victories:
Our Joe is merely being provocative, in the Jenks mode.
He knows perfectly well F1 history is replete with moral victors, +and+ he knows moral victories do matter to most responsible observers.
Another clear example is the enduring popularity of SSM, and the tiresome cliché attached to his name.
I find it difficult to go misty-eyed over the exploits of Snr. Senna, but there’s no question of +his+ moral victories during the McLaren lean years. As even the philosopher Eddie Irvine acknowledges.
I enjoy your use of the word responsible.
–
Suggesting cutting holes in the bodywork makes some rather large assumptions. First and foremost is that the alternator is close enough to the bodywork that a hole cut will help. Second, and more importantly, that the rules allow the team to cut a hole in the bodywork in an area that would feed air to the alternator. And finally, you don’t cut a hole without understanding the consequences of your actions – what’s the effect on cooling for other areas that would also receive the air, what’s the effect on the air flow behind the hole, what’s the effect on the air flow in front of and beside the hole, what’s the effect on the air flow above the hole, what’s the effect on the additional air flow through the space that lets the air out the back of the car.
Cutting a hole could, for example, cause a blockage of air as there’s too much trying to pass through a space behind the alternator which then overheats another part due to the disrupted air flow.
–
I wouldn’t mind some examples of these moral victories.
Your example of Senna during the lean McLaren years would suggest what? Senna’s ’93 Donington win wasn’t a moral victory, it was a real victory. Finishing second in a race in an inferior car is not a moral victory either, or would include Perez’s 2nd place in Malaysia as a moral victory?
I take it back, I can think of a moral victory for Senna. Japan 1991 when he moved over to let Berger win the race. Oh, hang on, that’s not a moral victory either, that was a generous act.
Or what about Schumacher dropping into the tail gunner position in Japan 1999, allowing Irvine to “fight” for the title? That would be a moral victory for Schumacher, yes? Oh, no it wouldn’t because if Schumacher had won with Hakkinen 2nd and Irvine 3rd, then Irvine would have been the first to break Ferrari’s driver title drought.
So please, do enlighten us all.
Glad my post brought joy to you heart.
Senna was, by most drivers, (the only opinion that counts) counted moral WDC victor throughout the McLaren “lean” years for simply driving the wheels of an inferior car to place it way beyond it’s theoretical potential.
Nobody counts Schumacher moral victor in any year, for obvious reasons.
Your nervous nelly approach to making cooling holes in the RedBull to cool the chocolate alternator is precisely why they haven’t fixed it yet.
Lotus, and Sir Jack, would have sorted it with a hack-saw by now.
Surtees would have included a length of ducting to make sure.
Keep in mind the venturi shaped air exit ducts would suck air out, and through, the tightly spaced bodywork, not force air in. Though a combination of in and out holes would surely fix it. Just keep the boffins at bay.
If we’re not entertaining and/or informing (and/or confusing) each other in the comments, then we’re doing it wrong
–
I wouldn’t mind a straw poll of drivers to find out their opinions on Senna during the lean years. I’d be surprised if the levels reached “most”. You have to drive the car you’re given, otherwise think of all the moral victories teams like Minardi have achieved. Using a race from one of McLaren’s lean years as an example, Monaco 1992. Mansell hounded Senna in the closing laps but couldn’t get past. Is that a moral victory for Mansell because he had the quicker car?
–
Continuing with the cooling holes, comparing the current F1 cars to those of the 60s and 70s isn’t exactly an accurate comparison. Making a hole in 60-something Lotus was less of an issue than in a current Red Bull. Adding a hole upsets the balance of the car and the knock-on effects need to be considered and assessed before the cut is made, not just front-to-rear but left-to-right.
It’s not that this cannot be done, but that it’s not as simple as just making the hole and saying “that’ll do it”.
‘Most’ count Damon Hill a ‘double WDC’? I haven’t heard that one before.
Somebody explain to Steve please… Ta!
A great issue – thanks to you all who produce it. I particularly enjoyed “Johnny Tramaline’s” piece about Alex Zanardi.
Excellent Zanardi article. Must be big demand for an official biography/autobiography about now, DT?
The Zanardi one was the one to read for me as well. Good piece.
Thanks for the comments about the Zanardi story. I love that guy! But my friend Gianluca Gasparini has already written Alex’s biography and done a brilliant job, far better than I could have. Look for Alex Zanardi: My Story on Amazon. I just bought a copy for Bruno Senna this evening, so I know they still have some. I took the Italian version to Haynes and was delighted when they published it in 2004. There is also a paperback version called Alex Zanardi: My Sweetest Victory published by Bentley.
Alex and Jean Alesi at Indy with Dario in 2013 – how cool will that be?
DT
PS. For aviators of a certain age, this Red Bull alternator problem reminds us of the pressure De Havilland were under, to find the cause of the Comet crashes. Which, as Neville Shute describes in his novel “Slide-Rule” was simply due to the shape of the windows.
Then there’s the charming true-story of Miss Shilling’s orifice.
Where lethal Merlin splutterings of dog-fighting Spitfires, made them easy picking for Me 109s, until a quick-witted lady engineer solved the problem.
Her contribution to winning the Battle of Britain is arguably greater than any individual pilot.
She was also a Brooklands petrol-head biker, and we salute her.
Come on you Red Bull gals, get this fixed for the next race, or stand ashamed.