Kovi warns his successor of favouritism for Lewis

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianp...gIw-2F6L9UAkyRw

That's two drivers warning of favouritism when it comes to Lewis. I can see why but it will be funny just seeing who supports this and remember what comments they made about other number one drivers

So we can add Kovalainen to the list of drivers to have come and gone across Woking's immaculately polished gravel, who claim that the mantra of "driver equality" is not true. Who will be next?

Kimi Raikkonen?

I hope it is Kimi because he's the only candidate who would get equal treatment to Hamilton. Much as I like Heidfeld, McLaren would probably treat him like a #2, as they have done Kovalainen.

The concept of equal drivers is flawed. No two drivers on one team can stop for service in the box at the same time. There is only one pit crew.

So, one gets the prefered strategy, the No.1. It will be less a factor next year with no refueling, but still one driver will be given first choice of his tire stop, probably determined during the race based on technical factors, and the other driver will be given a less than optimum pit choice. That is a technical fact.

For example, suppose Kimi joins Macca. Suppose he and Ham both want to stop on lap 20 at OZ for a tire change. Macca will decide who will stop on lap 20, they both cannot. The equality has now been compromised because a decison will be taken, and Hamilton will be preferred. That is a choice made by Macca on preference. There is no such thing as equality. You guys must accept this fact.

Now, one would assume that the driver that gets preference when choosing a tire change would also get the latest developments and the optimum choices all the way down the decision tree. And decisions made would be made to benefit the "choosen" one.

I think this is an argument that few of you can refute. If one can choose a pit stop preference, then all other preferences are pre-determined. Look back at the performance matricies ennunciated in your uni engineering classes for proof. Preference it at the top of every procedure.

This post has been edited by flood1 on Nov 2 2009, 01:46 AM

I assume McLaren would probably give advantage to the guy in front in that case. Kimi has a strong enough reputation to demand equal treatment, Kovalainen perhaps didn't.

I am not that naive, many decisions will have already been made well before the first race. Certainly the team has some concept of the preferred outcome for the season and many decisions will have already been taken to promote that outcome.

I would like to believe that each team driver starts on equal footing, but I do not believe it to be so. True, if one gains an advantage then the team shifts its focus. But there is no way, in my opinion, that Macca would start a season with that paradigm.

Besides, I am absolutely convinced that Kimi will not be at Macca next year.

This post has been edited by flood1 on Nov 2 2009, 02:03 AM

Wasnt Alonso complaining that he wasnt being treated as No. 1 driver? (its slightly different to complaing that he is not getting equal treatment)

with Kovalainen I think it has simply been a case of him not being quick enough. If Hamilton is far more capable of winning and getting every ounce of performance out of the car then it is probably natural for him to get preferential treatment.

ultimately its in the teams interests to have two competetive cars, but I dont think teams are in interested in sacraficing points or possible race wins just to keep a less competetive driver happy.

ALL teams no matter how professional will gravitate towards one driver, and when a driver has been groomed for years and has the team built around him it is naive to think any incoming driver can expect FULL equality despite the prostrations of the teams PR machine...

For some they are not so bothered, they sign up and take the money... and that is fine until they drone on about it later... bad form really... Kimi may join McLaren if he can get real about his true worth anyone else would be de facto no.2 and will sign up knowing this

That is what I think. When people say driver bias, it conjures up images of not getting equal equipment and being "sabotaged" but these things are simply not true. What Kovi is moaning about is pretty much what goes on in every team. One driver has to lead the team and they will get certain advantages, like first pick of crew and strategy. Also, they will, inevitably, get new car parts first when there is limited supply, which I think is fair because you have to maximise your chances at every race, so leaving new parts at home is a non-starter. Also, isn't it funny how Kovi seems to only say this because he is leaving the team. If they'd given him another contract, I'm sure he'd be singing McLaren's praises.

Does this mean that Kovalainen is in a way confirming he won't be at McLaren next season?

At the end of the day if whoever replaces Heikki proves to be quicker than Lewis then they will be the team's choice. But it is a bit odd that despite McLaren stating over the years that they treat all drivers equal there seems to be some sort of favouritism in the team (Senna, Haikkinen, Raikkonen, Hamilton)

As there is with every other team. OK, McLaren go to great lengths to disprove this but do you blame them after what Prost did in 1988 (publicly claiming bias from both Honda and McLaren, despite getting the lions share of the attention before the arrival of Senna).

So that mean's he's out of F1, seeing as he's said it's Mclaren or nothing.

I think he'll get equal treatment. He was #1 there for ages until Ferrari made him an offer he couldn't refuse.

Mclaren desperately need a WCC. If Kimi rejoins, they will have 2 WCC holders and a common foe, not one who desperately wants a WCC.

If not Kimi, then who will Mclaren choose? Rosberg?

I reckon Heidfeld is in a good position. He is cheaper than Kimi and more media friendly.

Geez... you could say that about just about any other F1 driver