The Formula One Insider
By Mitch McCann, USA
Atlas F1 Magazine Writer
SCHUMACHER WINS! SCHUMACHER WINS! SCHUMACHER WINS! In the most shocking and exciting race since the last one, Michael Schumacher triumphed by the narrowest of margins over championship challengers Rubens Barrichello and Jenson Button. After barely taking pole position, Schumacher was fortunate to take the lead into the first corner although he was continually harried by one challenger after another throughout the race and the outcome was not decided until the final corner when Barrichello's daring last minute lunge failed by mere inches. OK, so perhaps that's not completely, 100% accurate. But it would be nice if it was, wouldn't it? With the exception of the minor, trifling detail of who would win, this race was actually pretty exciting. Lots of passing and attempted passing, fairly few retirements and, of course, plenty of pitstops. There is of course no solution for it. Ferrari and Schumacher are the best and any rule tinkering to make it otherwise would simply reduce F1 to the level of NASCAR. Doesn't mean that I have to like it, though. Maybe we can do what they did in 1987 when they ran separate championships for turbo and normally aspirated cars. We'll just make the two championships for Ferraris and non-Ferraris. Not really fair on Rubens though, as he'd be the only person on the grid with no chance of winning anything. RUBENS RHUBARB RHUBARB Did anybody hear Rubens at the post race press conference? Did anybody understand what on earth he was going on about!? For any driver, beating your teammate is the ultimate proof to the world of your ability. And when you don't beat your teammate there are always excuses you can come up with. However, after all the years of being soundly beaten by Michael, Rubens is obviously having a tough time justifying to himself or anybody else that he is really the number 1A driver in the team. Let's listen in to Rubens' verbal gymnastics after the race and see if we can get some sense of what the hell he was talking about. "My car was great." So far so good but this was just about the last time that he made any sense. "Unfortunately the rain, we had some drops at the start, didn't come my way again, just like Malaysia." In English that would be something like: the rain that we didn't have in Malaysia was the same rain that we didn't get in Bahrain and that was a shame. Presumably that's because for some of the other drivers the rain they didn't get was different from the rain they didn't get before. "I hoped that some short-term rain might help...." Short-term rain has a maturity date of one year or less. "... just because my brakes were a little bit too cold and I needed to warm them up..." and rain is well known as nature's brake warmer. "... but at the same time I needed to save fuel a little bit on the out lap." The out lap is the one where you tell the world you're gay. "I almost had to avoid Michael on the first corner" But in the end I decided that I'd simply just almost hit him instead. "... and then he was very, very fast for the first couple of corners. So he got a gap and it was difficult to follow..." I'd lost my map. "... but I was within two or three tenths." See, I'm PDQ myself. Ten seconds into the race and I'm only three tenths of a second behind. "I knew as my brakes were coming better..." Now that the rain we didn't get in Malaysia had warmed them up. "... that I would have a chance to race with him a little bit closer but unfortunately I had a small problem on the pitstops..." The problem being that it was only during the pitstops that I was as fast as him. "...and he opened up the ten seconds." Even after I told him that he had to wait until Christmas. "Even though I got it sometimes to eight seconds it was difficult with traffic..." Michael doesn't have traffic. "... and so on..." Michael doesn't have so on. "... and he was fast anyway..." Oh yeah. There was that too. "... so it was just that ten seconds it was difficult to get back." He should just think himself lucky that 10 seconds is more than 8 seconds otherwise I would have been much closer to not losing by as much as he thought I was. JOS VERSTAPPEN WILL NOT BE MENTIONED IN THIS WEEK'S COLUMN (Again). Surely this would have been Jos' favorite track had he ever had the chance to race here. Imagine, a racetrack where you can't tell where the gravel traps end and the rest of the country begins. CAR WARS Did you see Star Wars creator George Lucas on the grid just before the race? The last time I saw a Hollywood star on the grid it was the prelude to the creation of the worst racing movie ever made – Sylvester Stallone's Drivel. Hopefully, Lucas' appearance does not mean that we will have to endure a Star Wars treatment of F1. Although now that I think of it, maybe it's not such a bad idea. We could have Kimi Trackwalker as the hero; David Coulthard could drive with R2D2 to repair mechanical problems as they go. Gerhard Berger could wear a black uniform and wander around the paddock deep breathing, "I am your father". He'd probably be right some of the time. And of course, the evil sponsor would be played by Tewbacca. At least it would be better than Drivel. RAIKONNEN REVEALS NEW STRATEGY McLaren driver Kimi Raikkonen revealed the team's new strategy by not bothering to participate in qualifying for the race. According to Ron Dennis, by the time they get back to Europe, McLaren should be ready to not bother showing up at the track at all and next year they may not even bother building a car. This will of course save all involved an awful lot of time and money. NEW TRACK DESIGNATION Effective immediately the side of the grid occupied by the junior Jaguar driver will be the Klien side and the side occupied by his teammate Mark Webber will, undoubtedly, be the dirty side. AND FINALLY... Good to see that the Italian judicial system has decided to continue the long running saga of the Senna trial. Apparently, the trial has to be re-done because the original judge failed to determine whether the steering column broke before the crash or as a result of the crash. Amazing. It's only taken the Italians 8 years to figure out that there's a difference between cause and effect. The rest of the F1 community has been debating this issue for years but apparently it only just occurred to the Italian judges that this might be important. I don't claim to know the answer but at least I know the question. If they couldn't even figure out which question to ask 8 years ago, what are the odds of them coming up with the right answer now?
© 2007 autosport.com
. This service is provided under the Atlas F1 terms and conditions.
Please Contact Us for permission to republish this or any other material from Atlas F1. |
|