Renault race-fixing at Singapore 2008

[mx_tifoso]

I remember Piquet answering a question related to this in the F1 Magazine. They asked him if he crashed on purpose, his response was something like "I'd be stupid to try and kill myself just so that Alonso could possibly win."

This investigation is an epic fail. Almost a year later, that is unbelievable.

[ISLAMATRON]

If he was so important bringyour proof, saying I am wrong is not proof. Even if DC was not between FA & LH, LH would not have been able to pass because it was Singapore... If LH could not pass DC he definitely could not have passed FA on the track. And the 1 lap extra that LH had in hand would probably have not been enough... when was the last time a 1 lap difference thru the pits led to a pass?

Raikkonen vs. Massa - France 2007
Schumacher vs. Fisichella - Shanghai 2006

There's two from the top of my head.

Also Lewis did pass DC on track... It was about 2 turns before DC made his 2nd stop AAANNND Trulli was passed by both Rosberg and Alonso in consecutive laps earlier in the race so overtaking was well possible.

The top of your head needs checking because France 2007 the FErrari drivers never pitted within 3 laps of each other, but you got the MS & Fisi one right... but we all know how bad Fisi was in that race, So bad it made Alonso cry over the radio and then after the race.... but good call.

I said DC was passed on track, read it again, but only after Alonso came out of the pits in front of DC and played roadblocker... and the Truilli train was more like a Trulli roadblock and that is why he was getting passed left & right(at the same time)... Singapore was 2nd only to Valencia in difficulty to pass last year.

[flynfrog]

If he was so important bringyour proof, saying I am wrong is not proof. Even if DC was not between FA & LH, LH would not have been able to pass because it was Singapore... If LH could not pass DC he definitely could not have passed FA on the track. And the 1 lap extra that LH had in hand would probably have not been enough... when was the last time a 1 lap difference thru the pits led to a pass?

Raikkonen vs. Massa - France 2007
Schumacher vs. Fisichella - Shanghai 2006

There's two from the top of my head.

Also Lewis did pass DC on track... It was about 2 turns before DC made his 2nd stop AAANNND Trulli was passed by both Rosberg and Alonso in consecutive laps earlier in the race so overtaking was well possible.

The top of your head needs checking because France 2007 the FErrari drivers never pitted within 3 laps of each other, but you got the MS & Fisi one right... but we all know how bad Fisi was in that race, So bad it made Alonso cry over the radio and then after the race.... but good call.

I said DC was passed on track, read it again, but only after Alonso came out of the pits in front of DC and played roadblocker... and the Truilli train was more like a Trulli roadblock and that is why he was getting passed left & right(at the same time)... Singapore was 2nd only to Valencia in difficulty to pass last year.

Dude just stop nobody wants to see the garbage you post. You have even been warned in this thread.

[Harrelson]

I think the Brazilian media are just bitter that one of their drivers was sacked and they're trying to get back at Renault by making false accusations.

[szlaszlo84]

Well all in all I think the whole thing comes down to this.

Undoubtedly Piquet's crash put Alonso in an ultimately race winning situation. I think it is useless to argue about what position he could have ended up in if Massa doesn't have a bad pit stop, LH doesn't end up in trouble etc. etc. At the end the results speak for themselves: he won.

The question whether if Renault could have figured that he will just end up in point scoring or actually win the race is irrelevant. The question is whether if Piquet was instructed to crash. And that can't be said without knowing the circumstances, knowing who said what, having documentation on who did what.

At the end I'd highly doubt that anybody will be able to prove anything. If this is indeed the case of a disgruntled Piquet turning on the team that sacked him than I think he probably wasn't instructed to crash in more than words, therefore he won't be able to prove nothing.

But take the case if they actually cheated; what then? Ultimately it wasn't the team driving the car but Piquet. He could have still after team requests acted with integrity and say no-no. In light of the way things turned out it most likely would have made no difference in his career anyways.

The second issue would have been whether if Alonso knew about this or not. Well I think if the team indeed cheated, he must have known. Otherwise I would have asked the team why am I on the worst pit strategy there is? Oh because the SC might come out right after you make your first pit stop. "MIGHT come out? I'd rather try for a solid race and not make such a huge gamble." At least that's how every reasonable racer would have thought.

You see if the SC comes out before Alonso pits or if the SC comes out too late, when everybody already pitted he would have been screwed either way. But like I said we won't know much unless somebody taped the conversations between the team members. And there is a fat chance for that.

[kilcoo316]

By the way, do you see what I did there... I brought proof... numbers, real world data, not your usual conjecture

It is generally accepted that the weight of 1 lap of fuel is 'worth' around 0.1 second in terms of lap time.

10kg ~= 0.3 sec and a lap usually taking ~3.something kg of fuel.

The average 'stint' in a race would be approximately 20 laps (in this case, Alonso's stop was 20 laps from the finish).

20 x 0.1 = 2 seconds (you could put a tolerance of 0.5 on that if you wanted).

That is the handicap due to fuel load alone that the man that pits first has to compensate for on his outlap.

Note that you need to factor in cold tyres.



Those numbers hard enough for you? I'm at work, so don't have time right now to go off and hunt out a load of examples of this happening. I will do that later. Here are just two results a quick google on a single search string gives:

Hungary 2005
"Schumacher pitted from the lead on lap 36 and Raikkonen stopped just one lap later, but that lap was enough to give him the advantage he needed to get ahead of the German while Montoya regained the lead."

Germany 2009
"On lap 50 Barrichello pits from second place, his team mate Button pits on the next lap - Button rejoining in fifth place ahead of Barrichello."

[gcdugas]

I think the whole thing is a load of BS..

Renault had improved the car by Singapore. Alonso lucked out when Piquet crashed, yes that's true..

However, he went on to win in Japan, without Piquet's "help".. So where's the story?

The whole thing is just a way for Piquet to get back at Flavio!

Remember that Fernando won the very next race at Fuji CLEARLY on merit and finished 2nd at Brasil. The car was manifestly getting faster at the end of the year. No driver scored more points in the last four races, or in the last three races discounting Singapore. And only Felipe equaled Fernando’s 33 pts in the last six races. That is consistency. It points to Singapore not being a fluke. A great “at-a-glance” chart is here. Just look at Fernando’s last six races and then ask yourself, was ALL of this the result of on track shenanigans? Clearly not.

Such scandalous claims also take credit away from the engineers who worked hard to find that speed in that car.

[gcdugas]

OK everyone has to repay their bookies.... Of course there has to be a time limit. And it should be at the end of each season. If it did affect the WDC, then why not undo it? So you see there is a definite need for a limit.

Why can't Max conduct this discretely? Why can't the FIA refuse to comment on accusations? So there is a report on Globo... Why can't the FIA just say that they are aware that charges have been made and leave it at that?

F1 doesn't need more scandal. I don’t agree that this should be conducted publicly. It is too inflammatory. It is like investigating a father who has been accused of molesting his children. If it turn out he is fully innocent, then the damage done by such an investigation will leave a irremovable taint form which recovery is impossible. No matter the outcome, the taint upon Renault will always be there. Even if it is proved to be 100% the fabrication of a disgruntled engineer, driver or whatever. It will always be lingering as a presence in people’s minds.

“Say, isn’t he the man who was accused of molesting his daughter?”

—Yeah but he was cleared and it was just an anonymous tip of a nosy neighbor who held a grudge.

“Well you know what they say… where there is smoke there is fire.”

You know what, I heard that Renault cheated. Yeah and that Flavio fellow also did some questionable traction control software things with the engines back in the 1990’s. I guess they have always been cheaters. Where there is smoke there is fire.

Great move Max, great for F1, let’s pressure Renault to leave F1 too. Can't you do anything in a discrete manner? Are you that stupid or has your evil vindictive rage has moved you to do a scorched earth policy before your discredited ass is shown the door?

[pgj]

This is one bit of the past that should never have been revisited in public if at all. This can only have one outcome - more damage to F1's image.

This has all the hallmarks of facts being selected to fit in with events.

[ISLAMATRON]

To me it would be much more damaging to F1's image if next year down the line someone came out with concrete evidence that it did happen and that the FIA had the evidence and did nothing at all about RACE FIXING, probably the most heinous crime in sport.

F1 & the FIa would lose all credibility.

They have every responsibility to investigate all avenues & claims, and the idea that anything is public or private these days is a bit naive to me.

[ESPImperium]

Personally Ive never driven Singapore in a sim racer so i may be coming from a completely wrong angle here.



To me the Piquet accident was completely his own doing, he went into Turn 17 a little hot from breaking a little too late for T16, in which case, he ran out of skill and talent and buried the throttle on the exit and spun in area of the track that had 2 red flags in previous sessions (Sutil and Webber @ T18) and thus the wall was waiting on the inside of the track. How many times has the guy crashed this year, 1st in Aus, second in Turkey are the 2 that come to mind, and he blamed cold brakes both times.

To me its the guy trying to stir up allot of B/S for his old employers as he felt either betrayed, abused and or worthless to the team.

The FIA will have a look at the telemetry and footage from the race, as well as their own race data. Hope they run a simulation and see what would have been the outcome.

I believe that Alonso was on a 3 stopper, that was modified to a 2 stopper, whitch would have seen him with points, but personally, i think Piquet is crying over spilt milk.

Im in no way defending Renault as we have to wait for the FIAs decision on the matter, BUT... I think Piquet is acting like a little boy, or like a woman scorned. The guy should just shut up and look for another team or a new formula, like what Bourdais has done, try and rectify something out of a pitiful career to date. And try and stop tarnishing his, as well as his fathers illustrious name as well.

[Conceptual]

There is no concrete evidence, but there must be compelling evidence to warrant such a large investigation.

*

[Motornic]

Yeah unless there are emails or phone recordings on this, how does one prove it to be true? If this just comes down to some score settling, circumstantial shenanigan on PK's word, FIA is just looking to push Renault out to make Mosley's claims of another pull-out a self-fulfilling prophecy.

On the other hand, makes you wonder if the talk of Alonso shopping around for 2010 may be because he heard of this long before anybody else did.

[WhiteBlue]

The authority of the FIA over their licensees is pretty comprehensive. If there was manipulation and a skilled investigator asks the questions there will be someone to talk. There is allways a competitor (in this case Massa) who suffers and is unhappy with tweaked results. People will talk over time.

[jon-mullen]

Ugh, Godwin's Law I guess.

Speaking of laws...by the Law of LARGE Numbers, wasn't one of Piquet's crashes bound to help Fernando? Everyone else seemed to benefit at some point.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ojfR3xS8FA[/youtube]

And btw, is anyone else concerned that the FOM won't even let you watch the crash for yourself on youtube?