planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Oct 21, 2018 4:15 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic

Most wins
Vettel, 39 wins, age 27 53%  53%  [ 112 ]
Alonso, 32 wins, age 33 2%  2%  [ 5 ]
Hamilton, 27 wins, age 29 45%  45%  [ 95 ]
Total votes : 212
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2018 8:52 pm 
All true, but it doesn’t change the fact that Vettel was unlucky. The marginal races I should have described as “luck”. 3 races were decided by SC timing and Hamilton won all three and Vettel could have also won all three if the SC didn’t come or came at a different time.

I think if you are including Baku as a track as Mercedes was dominant, then surely Malaysia for Ferrari too. No point being quick if something goes wrong with the car though. Both could/should have won Baku for varying reasons.

No doubt the Mercedes had more dominant weekends though, i think the Mercedes was the better car and once you allow for reliability even more so. However, was it a dominant car? Mercedes were lucky to win 12 races, i think 10 would be more fitting. Is winning half the races on merit a dominant car?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2018 9:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
KingVoid wrote:
pokerman wrote:
It was the faster car in qualifying but not the race itself were it was nip and tuck, Bottas himself stole 2 wins off Vettel's faster Ferrari through having better track position, it's hardly the resume of a dominant car which is what was put forward afterall.

Mercedes was clearly the fastest car in Austria. Bottas pulled away 8 seconds in the first stint before struggling on the prime tyres (as was tradition in 2017). Hamilton didn’t struggle on either tyre and was the fastest car on race day. In Russia, it was the same story. Mercedes faster on options, Ferrari faster on primes.

Also, the fact that Mercedes was faster in qualifying is kind of crucial, because track position wins races. Spa was the most obvious example of that.

Bottas had to turn his engine up to 11 to keep Vettel behind him in the last part of the race, I believe this might have caused a later engine failure for Bottas as he lent on the engine so much?

Anyway does this not start from claims of Mercedes having a dominant car in 2017, Austria would not be an example of that.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2018 9:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
KingVoid wrote:
pokerman wrote:
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:

I don't understand your last sentence that just confirms what I said, and let's just get things straight that last year was not a dominant car.


By what measure? Reliability? Poles? Wins? Off course it was dominant, not like earlier but I'll bet there isn't a driver who would have choosen any other car if they had a chance

Most wins: 12 - Mercedes; 5 - Ferrari; 3 - Red Bull
Most poles: 15 - Mercedes; 5 - Ferrari
Most podiums: 26 - Mercedes*; 20 - Ferrari; 13 - Red Bull; 1 - Williams
Most fastest laps: 9 - Mercedes; 7 - Ferrari; 2 - Red Bull; 1 - Force India, McLaren
Laps led: 714 - Mercedes; 326 - Ferrari; 156 - Red Bull

Vettel was leading the WDC two thirds of the way through the season until driver mistakes and reliability issues intervened, clearly Ferrari left some wins on the table and a dominant car doesn't need help from it's competition.

That’s because in the first half of the season, Vettel simply drove better than Hamilton did. Hamilton had several very mediocre drives in Russia and Monaco where he finished 4th and 7th in races where Mercedes was capable of he win (Russia) or at least a podium (Monaco).

Several being two, in those races Ferrari were still faster than Bottas' Mercedes.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2018 9:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
KingVoid wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
We’ve already gone over this before, and Mercedes was the faster car in the majority of qualifying sessions and the majority of races.

Also, the fact that Ferrari suffered mechanical failures in the crucial part of the season while Mercedes did not suggests that Mercedes didn’t feel the need to push the limit as hard as Ferrari did, that tells you something.

No actually; having gone through this several times last year, Mercedes and Ferrari were neck and neck up to the point when Hamilton sewed up the championship. It wasn't until the final two meaningless races that Mercedes pulled ahead on the season. The efforts you went to to try to paint last season as one where Ferrari were at a disadvantage where admirable but they don't change the underlying reality; which was that Ferrari were competitive throughout the entire championship. Mercedes just did a better job of maximizing what they had.

Nah, if the roles were reversed there is no way you would argue that Mercedes were on par with Ferrari.

Even if Ferrari was on par in race pace (which it was not), Mercedes had better qualifying pace, which gives you track position, and track position is an advantage that you carry into the race.

You are probably keen to say Ferrari was better in Belgium for instance, while completely ignoring that Mercedes was quicker in qualifying and that better top speed made it impossible for Vettel to overtake. In Belgium, Mercedes was clearly the car to have for the weekend even if Ferrari matched it on race pace.

A dominant car doesn't need to rely on track position in order to win races.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2018 9:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
AnRs wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Those are just the statistics that the team and drivers produced with their cars. Those stats don't tell you anything about whether one of the cars was dominant in performance. The real difference last year was driver errors and reliability problems. In terms of performance, the Mercedes and Ferrari were closely matched in 2017. To suggest that Mercedes had a dominant car last year is just flat out inaccurate.


Most Driver of the Day wins: 7 - Sebastian Vettel, thats the only stat in Ferrari favor. It was a Merc dominant car again.

First of all, that's a bogus stat. Hamilton was certainly driver of the day more than Vettel last year. Secondly, you've provided absolutely nothing to suggest the Mercedes was the dominant car last year.

The fact is that the Ferrari was on par with the Mercedes in terms of performance up until the point when the title was already decided. Vettel crashing on lap 1 in Singapore and then suffering a mechanical failure in qualifying in Malaysia and in the race in Japan was the reason Ferrari fell out of the title picture. They had a faster car than Mercedes easily in two of those three races. You want to suggest that because Mercedes won more races, they were faster but that's actually just an assumption made while ignoring the actual events of last year. There were just as many races where Ferrari were quicker as races where Mercedes were quicker. Hamilton/Mercedes just did a better job overall and the Ferrari suffered reliability issues at a very inopportune time.

I don't think it is a fact, though. There's enough evidence to suggest the Mercedes was comfortably the faster car

It was the faster car in qualifying but not the race itself were it was nip and tuck, Bottas himself stole 2 wins off Vettel's faster Ferrari through having better track position, it's hardly the resume of a dominant car which is what was put forward afterall.

I wouldn't call it a dominant car, but I take issue with stating as a fact that the Ferrari was on a par with the Mercedes. I think there's more evidence to suggest the Mercedes was quicker. Even if it's just in qualifying - which I'm not sure I'd agree with - that still gives it a pretty hefty advantage, since track position is so key


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2018 11:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
AnRs wrote:
Most Driver of the Day wins: 7 - Sebastian Vettel, thats the only stat in Ferrari favor. It was a Merc dominant car again.

First of all, that's a bogus stat. Hamilton was certainly driver of the day more than Vettel last year. Secondly, you've provided absolutely nothing to suggest the Mercedes was the dominant car last year.

The fact is that the Ferrari was on par with the Mercedes in terms of performance up until the point when the title was already decided. Vettel crashing on lap 1 in Singapore and then suffering a mechanical failure in qualifying in Malaysia and in the race in Japan was the reason Ferrari fell out of the title picture. They had a faster car than Mercedes easily in two of those three races. You want to suggest that because Mercedes won more races, they were faster but that's actually just an assumption made while ignoring the actual events of last year. There were just as many races where Ferrari were quicker as races where Mercedes were quicker. Hamilton/Mercedes just did a better job overall and the Ferrari suffered reliability issues at a very inopportune time.

I don't think it is a fact, though. There's enough evidence to suggest the Mercedes was comfortably the faster car

It was the faster car in qualifying but not the race itself were it was nip and tuck, Bottas himself stole 2 wins off Vettel's faster Ferrari through having better track position, it's hardly the resume of a dominant car which is what was put forward afterall.

I wouldn't call it a dominant car, but I take issue with stating as a fact that the Ferrari was on a par with the Mercedes. I think there's more evidence to suggest the Mercedes was quicker. Even if it's just in qualifying - which I'm not sure I'd agree with - that still gives it a pretty hefty advantage, since track position is so key

But that is the only point I was making, a dominant car doesn't go nip and tuck in the races it just sails away and it hardly loses.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 1:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2274
pokerman wrote:
But that is the only point I was making, a dominant car doesn't go nip and tuck in the races it just sails away and it hardly loses.

I agree that Mercedes was not a dominant car, but the cars weren’t equal either. There’s a middle ground.

Not a dominant car, but still the outright best car.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 6:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9272
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
AnRs wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Those are just the statistics that the team and drivers produced with their cars. Those stats don't tell you anything about whether one of the cars was dominant in performance. The real difference last year was driver errors and reliability problems. In terms of performance, the Mercedes and Ferrari were closely matched in 2017. To suggest that Mercedes had a dominant car last year is just flat out inaccurate.


Most Driver of the Day wins: 7 - Sebastian Vettel, thats the only stat in Ferrari favor. It was a Merc dominant car again.

First of all, that's a bogus stat. Hamilton was certainly driver of the day more than Vettel last year. Secondly, you've provided absolutely nothing to suggest the Mercedes was the dominant car last year.

The fact is that the Ferrari was on par with the Mercedes in terms of performance up until the point when the title was already decided. Vettel crashing on lap 1 in Singapore and then suffering a mechanical failure in qualifying in Malaysia and in the race in Japan was the reason Ferrari fell out of the title picture. They had a faster car than Mercedes easily in two of those three races. You want to suggest that because Mercedes won more races, they were faster but that's actually just an assumption made while ignoring the actual events of last year. There were just as many races where Ferrari were quicker as races where Mercedes were quicker. Hamilton/Mercedes just did a better job overall and the Ferrari suffered reliability issues at a very inopportune time.

I count it 7-3 in Vettel´s favor. Also Bottas and Verstappen had 3 DoD wins.

Who won Driver of the Weekend?

Is that a thing outside of this forum?

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 7:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11411
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
you know that both Vettel and Verstappen have decided they don't want to join Mercedes whilst Hamilton is there


Do I? Have they actually spoken that out?

I do know that Hamilton has actually spoken out he doesn't want Alonso in there with him. That's the only thing I'm sure of.

Quote:
but on another level it's better because if he has the best car then it makes it easier for him to win the title, and I guess it's this aspect that people don't like?


Not that it's easier for him, just when there is no actual competition (barring unreliability of sorts) in a highly dominant team.

You remember some things but not others


Which is why I am literally asking the question. I cannot pretend to remember every single thing. So that's why I'm asking.

Quote:
Verstappen specifically gave his reason for not being interested in the Mercedes seat, Hamilton said that Vettel was speaking to Toto after Rosberg announced his retirement.


Did Verstappen say he didn't want to go there because he doesn't want to drive alongside Hamilton? Can you produce some link? Same for Vettel?

And you missed the point entirely - you are seemingly blaming Vettel and Verstappen for (allegedly) not wanting tier 1 competition but then you do not mention Hamilton who has that same idea about tier 1 competition.


Quote:
I don't understand your last sentence that just confirms what I said, and let's just get things straight that last year was not a dominant car.


You asked whether I didn't like it because Hamilton has an easier time. My answer is that it's not about Hamilton personally, just the idea of having a dominant team up front with no actual competition within the team. And we're talking about the coming years, not about last year. I agree the W08 was not a dominant car. The best, but not dominant.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 9:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
First of all, that's a bogus stat. Hamilton was certainly driver of the day more than Vettel last year. Secondly, you've provided absolutely nothing to suggest the Mercedes was the dominant car last year.

The fact is that the Ferrari was on par with the Mercedes in terms of performance up until the point when the title was already decided. Vettel crashing on lap 1 in Singapore and then suffering a mechanical failure in qualifying in Malaysia and in the race in Japan was the reason Ferrari fell out of the title picture. They had a faster car than Mercedes easily in two of those three races. You want to suggest that because Mercedes won more races, they were faster but that's actually just an assumption made while ignoring the actual events of last year. There were just as many races where Ferrari were quicker as races where Mercedes were quicker. Hamilton/Mercedes just did a better job overall and the Ferrari suffered reliability issues at a very inopportune time.

I don't think it is a fact, though. There's enough evidence to suggest the Mercedes was comfortably the faster car

It was the faster car in qualifying but not the race itself were it was nip and tuck, Bottas himself stole 2 wins off Vettel's faster Ferrari through having better track position, it's hardly the resume of a dominant car which is what was put forward afterall.

I wouldn't call it a dominant car, but I take issue with stating as a fact that the Ferrari was on a par with the Mercedes. I think there's more evidence to suggest the Mercedes was quicker. Even if it's just in qualifying - which I'm not sure I'd agree with - that still gives it a pretty hefty advantage, since track position is so key

But that is the only point I was making, a dominant car doesn't go nip and tuck in the races it just sails away and it hardly loses.

sure, but you were answering a post which claimed as fact that the Ferrari was on a par with Mercedes. That's the point I was contesting!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5480
It's pointless to go through this again because I think that people made their positions clear last season with regards to how they felt the cars matched up to each other but I just find it interesting how people don't seem to realize that all they are doing is looking at the end result and attributing it to the car. There is no effort to separate the likely performance of the car from the performance of the driver. As such, as long as Hamilton keeps winning, by these people's thought process, he has the best car...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
sandman1347 wrote:
It's pointless to go through this again because I think that people made their positions clear last season with regards to how they felt the cars matched up to each other but I just find it interesting how people don't seem to realize that all they are doing is looking at the end result and attributing it to the car. There is no effort to separate the likely performance of the car from the performance of the driver. As such, as long as Hamilton keeps winning, by these people's thought process, he has the best car...

sounds quite similar to people's thought processes when Vettel was winning his titles, tbh.

I don't think people are attributing everything to the car (perhaps in some cases, but not all). A lot depends on your starting point for the drivers relative to each other, of course.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:06 pm 
Vettel, rightly so had more question marks over his RB titles. He had only gone up against very weak drivers and Webber who was the number 2, aging and never top quality.

Much like Button, who validated his title by being close to Hamilton, Vettel validated his titles the last few years by smashing Raikkonen. If Kimi had matched Vettel the last few years then Vettels titles would rightly be deemed - pretty much the car. Especially after Ricciardo beating him, vettel would only be looking like a top 8 driver on the grid at the moment.

Vettel is a top 3 driver, but that wasn’t always clear especially immediately after and during 2014. His 4 titles look a lot better now than they did at the time.

Hamilton had proved himself long before stepping into a dominant car though, so he isn’t really compariable to Vettel.

Top drivers can also make equal or marginally the best car, look dominant - like Schumacher in 2001 and parts of 2002. Senna and Prost in 1989.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
AnRs wrote:
Most Driver of the Day wins: 7 - Sebastian Vettel, thats the only stat in Ferrari favor. It was a Merc dominant car again.

First of all, that's a bogus stat. Hamilton was certainly driver of the day more than Vettel last year. Secondly, you've provided absolutely nothing to suggest the Mercedes was the dominant car last year.

The fact is that the Ferrari was on par with the Mercedes in terms of performance up until the point when the title was already decided. Vettel crashing on lap 1 in Singapore and then suffering a mechanical failure in qualifying in Malaysia and in the race in Japan was the reason Ferrari fell out of the title picture. They had a faster car than Mercedes easily in two of those three races. You want to suggest that because Mercedes won more races, they were faster but that's actually just an assumption made while ignoring the actual events of last year. There were just as many races where Ferrari were quicker as races where Mercedes were quicker. Hamilton/Mercedes just did a better job overall and the Ferrari suffered reliability issues at a very inopportune time.

I count it 7-3 in Vettel´s favor. Also Bottas and Verstappen had 3 DoD wins.

Who won Driver of the Weekend?

Is that a thing outside of this forum?

Fair enough I thought we were talking about the forum in the first place

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I don't think it is a fact, though. There's enough evidence to suggest the Mercedes was comfortably the faster car

It was the faster car in qualifying but not the race itself were it was nip and tuck, Bottas himself stole 2 wins off Vettel's faster Ferrari through having better track position, it's hardly the resume of a dominant car which is what was put forward afterall.

I wouldn't call it a dominant car, but I take issue with stating as a fact that the Ferrari was on a par with the Mercedes. I think there's more evidence to suggest the Mercedes was quicker. Even if it's just in qualifying - which I'm not sure I'd agree with - that still gives it a pretty hefty advantage, since track position is so key

But that is the only point I was making, a dominant car doesn't go nip and tuck in the races it just sails away and it hardly loses.

sure, but you were answering a post which claimed as fact that the Ferrari was on a par with Mercedes. That's the point I was contesting!

I believe it was as quick as the Mercedes in the races.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
sandman1347 wrote:
It's pointless to go through this again because I think that people made their positions clear last season with regards to how they felt the cars matched up to each other but I just find it interesting how people don't seem to realize that all they are doing is looking at the end result and attributing it to the car. There is no effort to separate the likely performance of the car from the performance of the driver. As such, as long as Hamilton keeps winning, by these people's thought process, he has the best car...

Yeah it's a default position for some that is somewhat frustrating, if Hamilton wins it's because of the car and if Vettel wins it's because of him which is what you also see in DOTD as someone brought forward as a reason for Vettel being the better driver last season.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
It was the faster car in qualifying but not the race itself were it was nip and tuck, Bottas himself stole 2 wins off Vettel's faster Ferrari through having better track position, it's hardly the resume of a dominant car which is what was put forward afterall.

I wouldn't call it a dominant car, but I take issue with stating as a fact that the Ferrari was on a par with the Mercedes. I think there's more evidence to suggest the Mercedes was quicker. Even if it's just in qualifying - which I'm not sure I'd agree with - that still gives it a pretty hefty advantage, since track position is so key

But that is the only point I was making, a dominant car doesn't go nip and tuck in the races it just sails away and it hardly loses.

sure, but you were answering a post which claimed as fact that the Ferrari was on a par with Mercedes. That's the point I was contesting!

I believe it was as quick as the Mercedes in the races.

belief is fine. It's claiming it as a fact that isn't


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
lamo wrote:
Vettel, rightly so had more question marks over his RB titles. He had only gone up against very weak drivers and Webber who was the number 2, aging and never top quality.

Much like Button, who validated his title by being close to Hamilton, Vettel validated his titles the last few years by smashing Raikkonen. If Kimi had matched Vettel the last few years then Vettels titles would rightly be deemed - pretty much the car. Especially after Ricciardo beating him, vettel would only be looking like a top 8 driver on the grid at the moment.

Vettel is a top 3 driver, but that wasn’t always clear especially immediately after and during 2014. His 4 titles look a lot better now than they did at the time.

Hamilton had proved himself long before stepping into a dominant car though, so he isn’t really compariable to Vettel.

Top drivers can also make equal or marginally the best car, look dominant - like Schumacher in 2001 and parts of 2002. Senna and Prost in 1989.

Excellent post :thumbup:

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I wouldn't call it a dominant car, but I take issue with stating as a fact that the Ferrari was on a par with the Mercedes. I think there's more evidence to suggest the Mercedes was quicker. Even if it's just in qualifying - which I'm not sure I'd agree with - that still gives it a pretty hefty advantage, since track position is so key

But that is the only point I was making, a dominant car doesn't go nip and tuck in the races it just sails away and it hardly loses.

sure, but you were answering a post which claimed as fact that the Ferrari was on a par with Mercedes. That's the point I was contesting!

I believe it was as quick as the Mercedes in the races.

belief is fine. It's claiming it as a fact that isn't

Likewise you can't claim otherwise then.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
But that is the only point I was making, a dominant car doesn't go nip and tuck in the races it just sails away and it hardly loses.

sure, but you were answering a post which claimed as fact that the Ferrari was on a par with Mercedes. That's the point I was contesting!

I believe it was as quick as the Mercedes in the races.

belief is fine. It's claiming it as a fact that isn't

Likewise you can't claim otherwise then.

Don't think I have?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 5:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 954
By all facts there is Merc Was the car to have in 2017.

To claim that Vettel is unproven is ridiculous by now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 6:47 pm 
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
It's pointless to go through this again because I think that people made their positions clear last season with regards to how they felt the cars matched up to each other but I just find it interesting how people don't seem to realize that all they are doing is looking at the end result and attributing it to the car. There is no effort to separate the likely performance of the car from the performance of the driver. As such, as long as Hamilton keeps winning, by these people's thought process, he has the best car...

Yeah it's a default position for some that is somewhat frustrating, if Hamilton wins it's because of the car and if Vettel wins it's because of him which is what you also see in DOTD as someone brought forward as a reason for Vettel being the better driver last season.


The Kimi Raikkonen affect, boosting drivers reputations since 2007. Massa... Alonso... Vettel... even Grosjean for a short while but its gone back down now. The entire notion than Massa is anything other than around average is based on how he did against Kimi. This isn't a Vettel bash, as he has thrashed Kimi and done very well.

Similarly, if Hamilton has a bad day at the moment, then Bottas has a good chance of beating him. Such as Russia and Monaco. Admitedly those were awful weekends by Lewis. If Vettel has a bad day, instead of being 0.5 ahead of Kimi, he is just 0.1 ahead or very marginally behind. So bad days don't show up so much. The general assumption is Vettel got the most out of the more weekends than Lewis, based largely on the above.

Hamilton had this luxury also in 2008, on the off days he was a little bit better than Heikki. On normal days he thrashed him.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 6:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5480
lamo wrote:
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
It's pointless to go through this again because I think that people made their positions clear last season with regards to how they felt the cars matched up to each other but I just find it interesting how people don't seem to realize that all they are doing is looking at the end result and attributing it to the car. There is no effort to separate the likely performance of the car from the performance of the driver. As such, as long as Hamilton keeps winning, by these people's thought process, he has the best car...

Yeah it's a default position for some that is somewhat frustrating, if Hamilton wins it's because of the car and if Vettel wins it's because of him which is what you also see in DOTD as someone brought forward as a reason for Vettel being the better driver last season.


The Kimi Raikkonen affect, boosting drivers reputations since 2007. Massa... Alonso... Vettel... even Grosjean for a short while but its gone back down now. The entire notion than Massa is anything other than around average is based on how he did against Kimi. This isn't a Vettel bash, as he has thrashed Kimi and done very well.

Similarly, if Hamilton has a bad day at the moment, then Bottas has a good chance of beating him. Such as Russia and Monaco. Admitedly those were awful weekends by Lewis. If Vettel has a bad day, instead of being 0.5 ahead of Kimi, he is just 0.1 ahead or very marginally behind. So bad days don't show up so much. The general assumption is Vettel got the most out of the more weekends than Lewis, based largely on the above.

Hamilton had this luxury also in 2008, on the off days he was a little bit better than Heikki. On normal days he thrashed him.

2008 is an important season to make note of. It shows that, even with a slightly slower car, Hamilton won the WDC largely because he and his team were focused on maximizing his points haul. By not losing points to his teammate, he was able to secure the championship despite not really being in top form that year and not having the best car. The relative weakness of your teammate is probably the most underrated element to a championship campaign. It makes a HUGE impact.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 7:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 954
Another myth, the McLaren of 2007 and 2008 Was voted Car of the year and even the driver Said it Was the best car. Why this urge to talk down Lewis cars?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 7:22 pm 
AnRs wrote:
Another myth, the McLaren of 2007 and 2008 Was voted Car of the year and even the driver Said it Was the best car. Why this urge to talk down Lewis cars?


The driver who said that at the end of 2007 when he was basically equal to Massa in every statistic that year (except Massa had worse luck putting him down the championship order slightly) and then thrashed him for 4 years straight when his team mate? I would be more interested in his true thoughts now, he surely can't rate Massa as his equal? Raikkonen too. Alonso must know (think) he is better than those two?

Lots of things were unknown at the end of 2007...

-How good was Hamilton? Was he flattered by Alonso having an awful year? We now know Hamilton is a top driver and likely Alonso's level.

-What happened to Kimi's speed? With Schumacher retired, Kimi was considered by many "The fastest man in F1" alongside Alonso. Massa was considered barely a top 10 driver. Was 2007 a one off for Kimi? He was expected to come in and be the same 0.5 faster than Massa that Schumacher was. Fast forward to the end of 2009 and we now know Kimi is equal to Massa in three different types of car. Without/without traction control, grooved/slick tyres, extreme aero cars of 2007-8/ reduced aero cars of 2009. 2007 wasn't a freak year in which Kimi undervperformed, in fact it was his best year against Massa. That was his genuine level, that of Massa.

So Alonso's comments at the end of 2007 are pretty meaningless now. What Mclaren had was probably the best driver-car package (once allowing for reliability), but not the best car.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 7:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 954
In 2007 McLaren Threw away a Huge lead in the second half and Was outperformed by Kimi in the end, in 2008 I wouldn’t say that neither McLaren nor Ferrari where smoothe operating. It’s still so that McLaren Was voted the car of the year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5480
AnRs wrote:
In 2007 McLaren Threw away a Huge lead in the second half and Was outperformed by Kimi in the end, in 2008 I wouldn’t say that neither McLaren nor Ferrari where smoothe operating. It’s still so that McLaren Was voted the car of the year.

You keep pointing that out as though it carries some kind of weight. What exactly do you think it means that people voted for a car as "Car of the Year"? At that time, a lot of pundits believed that Kimi was the "fastest man in F1". Hamilton was a totally unknown commodity and Alonso was generally not given the respect he deserved relative to Kimi's reputation at the time. That's where that vote came from; ignorance.

Considering the fact that Alonso spent time as teammates to both of Ferrari's drivers that year and was comfortably ahead of both of them the whole time, what conclusion would you draw with regards to the 2007 and 2008 Ferrari? Really there is no other reasonable conclusion to come to other than that the Ferrari was a slightly quicker car than the Mclaren during those years. It was quick enough to make up for the deficit of Kimi/Massa to Hamilton/Alonso such that you had two close championships.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:06 pm 
sandman1347 wrote:
Really there is no other reasonable conclusion to come to other than that the Ferrari was a slightly quicker car than the Mclaren during those years. It was quick enough to make up for the deficit of Kimi/Massa to Hamilton/Alonso such that you had two close championships.



It makes you wonder, what if Hamilton retired last year. What would people make of Bottas fighting closely for the title against Vettel in 2018 and narrowly beating him in the final race?

To me, on what we know so far, surely the Mercedes would have to be superior. People see a close championship fight and think the cars have to be equal for some weird reason. Vettel already beat Bottas last year in a slightly inferior car.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5480
lamo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Really there is no other reasonable conclusion to come to other than that the Ferrari was a slightly quicker car than the Mclaren during those years. It was quick enough to make up for the deficit of Kimi/Massa to Hamilton/Alonso such that you had two close championships.



It makes you wonder, what if Hamilton retired last year. What would people make of Bottas fighting closely for the title against Vettel in 2018 and narrowly beating him in the final race?

To me, on what we know so far, surely the Mercedes would have to be superior. People see a close championship fight and think the cars have to be equal for some weird reason.

We know absolutely nothing about how Bottas stacks up against Vettel. This is something you would need to know in order to be able to assess with certainty how closely matched last year's cars were. We know that massa was marginally quicker than Kimi and that Bottas was marginally quicker than massa. We also know that there was a huge gap between Alonso and both of them and roughly identical performance between a veteran Alonso and a rookie Hamilton. So we know that hamilton is easily better than Raikkonen and we also know that Alonso was better than Raikkonen by a bigger margin than Vettel. So start putting the picture together there. ;) Also your scenario about Bottas narrowly beating Vettel in the final race assumes everything would work out exactly the same without Hamilton in the picture (which is a totally absurd assumption).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Really there is no other reasonable conclusion to come to other than that the Ferrari was a slightly quicker car than the Mclaren during those years. It was quick enough to make up for the deficit of Kimi/Massa to Hamilton/Alonso such that you had two close championships.



It makes you wonder, what if Hamilton retired last year. What would people make of Bottas fighting closely for the title against Vettel in 2018 and narrowly beating him in the final race?

To me, on what we know so far, surely the Mercedes would have to be superior. People see a close championship fight and think the cars have to be equal for some weird reason.

We know absolutely nothing about how Bottas stacks up against Vettel. This is something you would need to know in order to be able to assess with certainty how closely matched last year's cars were. We know that massa was marginally quicker than Kimi and that Bottas was marginally quicker than massa. We also know that there was a huge gap between Alonso and both of them and roughly identical performance between a veteran Alonso and a rookie Hamilton. So we know that hamilton is easily better than Raikkonen and we also know that Alonso was better than Raikkonen by a bigger margin than Vettel. So start putting the picture together there. ;) Also your scenario about Bottas narrowly beating Vettel in the final race assumes everything would work out exactly the same without Hamilton in the picture (which is a totally absurd assumption).

Alonso was better than Kimi by a similar margin to Vettel. We know that, too


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:27 pm 
I guess it depends on what Bottas you get;

The one who is 0.5-0.7 off of Hamilton - he turned up about 5 times last year.
The one who is 0.2-0.3 off of Hamilton - he turned up about 5 times last year.
The one who is within 0.1-0.2 of Hamilton - he turned up about 5 times last year.
The one who is quicker or less than a tenth behind - he turned up about 5 times last year.

In a best case scenario for Bottas, he is ever so slightly quicker than Vettel over a season. But he is still wildly inconsistent. Realistically, I would be very surprised if he could beat Vettel over a season in the same car. I'm pretty sure he is better than Raikkonen at this stage though.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:31 pm 
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Really there is no other reasonable conclusion to come to other than that the Ferrari was a slightly quicker car than the Mclaren during those years. It was quick enough to make up for the deficit of Kimi/Massa to Hamilton/Alonso such that you had two close championships.



It makes you wonder, what if Hamilton retired last year. What would people make of Bottas fighting closely for the title against Vettel in 2018 and narrowly beating him in the final race?

To me, on what we know so far, surely the Mercedes would have to be superior. People see a close championship fight and think the cars have to be equal for some weird reason.

We know absolutely nothing about how Bottas stacks up against Vettel. This is something you would need to know in order to be able to assess with certainty how closely matched last year's cars were. We know that massa was marginally quicker than Kimi and that Bottas was marginally quicker than massa. We also know that there was a huge gap between Alonso and both of them and roughly identical performance between a veteran Alonso and a rookie Hamilton. So we know that hamilton is easily better than Raikkonen and we also know that Alonso was better than Raikkonen by a bigger margin than Vettel. So start putting the picture together there. ;) Also your scenario about Bottas narrowly beating Vettel in the final race assumes everything would work out exactly the same without Hamilton in the picture (which is a totally absurd assumption).

Alonso was better than Kimi by a similar margin to Vettel. We know that, too



Its always hard using 1 year of data and plus Kimi was new to Ferrari for '14 and Vettel new for '15. But wasn't Vettel 0.1-0.2 slower using 2015 data. Which I think is a good effort considering those first 2 facts.

Has Kimi got quicker relative to Vettel, obviously his 2016 was much better but how did 2017 compare to 2015? I haven't seen any analysis on this, does anybody know the gist?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 954
All of this driver A in season B beat driver C is all an assumption that nothing changes which is IMO wrong. Kimi and Ferrari where the fastest in the second half off 2007. In 2008 none of them had a very good season IMO. Some of these drivers have changed teams multiple Times.

Why is it so hard to believe that F1 fans by then could judge the cars performance?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5480
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Really there is no other reasonable conclusion to come to other than that the Ferrari was a slightly quicker car than the Mclaren during those years. It was quick enough to make up for the deficit of Kimi/Massa to Hamilton/Alonso such that you had two close championships.



It makes you wonder, what if Hamilton retired last year. What would people make of Bottas fighting closely for the title against Vettel in 2018 and narrowly beating him in the final race?

To me, on what we know so far, surely the Mercedes would have to be superior. People see a close championship fight and think the cars have to be equal for some weird reason.

We know absolutely nothing about how Bottas stacks up against Vettel. This is something you would need to know in order to be able to assess with certainty how closely matched last year's cars were. We know that massa was marginally quicker than Kimi and that Bottas was marginally quicker than massa. We also know that there was a huge gap between Alonso and both of them and roughly identical performance between a veteran Alonso and a rookie Hamilton. So we know that hamilton is easily better than Raikkonen and we also know that Alonso was better than Raikkonen by a bigger margin than Vettel. So start putting the picture together there. ;) Also your scenario about Bottas narrowly beating Vettel in the final race assumes everything would work out exactly the same without Hamilton in the picture (which is a totally absurd assumption).

Alonso was better than Kimi by a similar margin to Vettel. We know that, too

Actually Alonso had a slightly bigger margin to Raikkonen than Vettel.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3414
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Really there is no other reasonable conclusion to come to other than that the Ferrari was a slightly quicker car than the Mclaren during those years. It was quick enough to make up for the deficit of Kimi/Massa to Hamilton/Alonso such that you had two close championships.



It makes you wonder, what if Hamilton retired last year. What would people make of Bottas fighting closely for the title against Vettel in 2018 and narrowly beating him in the final race?

To me, on what we know so far, surely the Mercedes would have to be superior. People see a close championship fight and think the cars have to be equal for some weird reason.

We know absolutely nothing about how Bottas stacks up against Vettel. This is something you would need to know in order to be able to assess with certainty how closely matched last year's cars were. We know that massa was marginally quicker than Kimi and that Bottas was marginally quicker than massa. We also know that there was a huge gap between Alonso and both of them and roughly identical performance between a veteran Alonso and a rookie Hamilton. So we know that hamilton is easily better than Raikkonen and we also know that Alonso was better than Raikkonen by a bigger margin than Vettel. So start putting the picture together there. ;) Also your scenario about Bottas narrowly beating Vettel in the final race assumes everything would work out exactly the same without Hamilton in the picture (which is a totally absurd assumption).

Alonso was better than Kimi by a similar margin to Vettel. We know that, too

Actually Alonso had a slightly bigger margin to Raikkonen than Vettel.


Thats what i seem to remember as well. I mean, did Kimi even score one win on merit over alonso in 2014? He got absolutely destroyed that year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5480
kleefton wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo wrote:


It makes you wonder, what if Hamilton retired last year. What would people make of Bottas fighting closely for the title against Vettel in 2018 and narrowly beating him in the final race?

To me, on what we know so far, surely the Mercedes would have to be superior. People see a close championship fight and think the cars have to be equal for some weird reason.

We know absolutely nothing about how Bottas stacks up against Vettel. This is something you would need to know in order to be able to assess with certainty how closely matched last year's cars were. We know that massa was marginally quicker than Kimi and that Bottas was marginally quicker than massa. We also know that there was a huge gap between Alonso and both of them and roughly identical performance between a veteran Alonso and a rookie Hamilton. So we know that hamilton is easily better than Raikkonen and we also know that Alonso was better than Raikkonen by a bigger margin than Vettel. So start putting the picture together there. ;) Also your scenario about Bottas narrowly beating Vettel in the final race assumes everything would work out exactly the same without Hamilton in the picture (which is a totally absurd assumption).

Alonso was better than Kimi by a similar margin to Vettel. We know that, too

Actually Alonso had a slightly bigger margin to Raikkonen than Vettel.


Thats what i seem to remember as well. I mean, did Kimi even score one win on merit over alonso in 2014? He got absolutely destroyed that year.

It was 16-3 in qualifying and I think even worse on race day. Vettel has been easily better than Kimi but not by quite the same margin.
https://www.racefans.net/2014/12/03/win ... tles-2014/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 9:31 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14194
lamo wrote:
I guess it depends on what Bottas you get;

The one who is 0.5-0.7 off of Hamilton - he turned up about 5 times last year.
The one who is 0.2-0.3 off of Hamilton - he turned up about 5 times last year.
The one who is within 0.1-0.2 of Hamilton - he turned up about 5 times last year.
The one who is quicker or less than a tenth behind - he turned up about 5 times last year.

In a best case scenario for Bottas, he is ever so slightly quicker than Vettel over a season. But he is still wildly inconsistent. Realistically, I would be very surprised if he could beat Vettel over a season in the same car. I'm pretty sure he is better than Raikkonen at this stage though.


Is it Bottas or Hamilton that is inconsistent...

I don't know the answer but I do know that the Hamilton/Rosberg gap swung around wildly as well. Especially in 2016.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 9:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4862
Massa-Bottas did to an extent. 2014 to first half of 2015 Massa edged it in the stats but second half of 2015 and the entire 2016 Bottas blew him away Alonso style.

You could check Button-Lewis for balance as well to see if it swung.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 10:49 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14194
Lotus49 wrote:
Massa-Bottas did to an extent. 2014 to first half of 2015 Massa edged it in the stats but second half of 2015 and the entire 2016 Bottas blew him away Alonso style.

You could check Button-Lewis for balance as well to see if it swung.


Yes but I mean more from race to race rather than form over a period of time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 12:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27960
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo wrote:
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
It's pointless to go through this again because I think that people made their positions clear last season with regards to how they felt the cars matched up to each other but I just find it interesting how people don't seem to realize that all they are doing is looking at the end result and attributing it to the car. There is no effort to separate the likely performance of the car from the performance of the driver. As such, as long as Hamilton keeps winning, by these people's thought process, he has the best car...

Yeah it's a default position for some that is somewhat frustrating, if Hamilton wins it's because of the car and if Vettel wins it's because of him which is what you also see in DOTD as someone brought forward as a reason for Vettel being the better driver last season.


The Kimi Raikkonen affect, boosting drivers reputations since 2007. Massa... Alonso... Vettel... even Grosjean for a short while but its gone back down now. The entire notion than Massa is anything other than around average is based on how he did against Kimi. This isn't a Vettel bash, as he has thrashed Kimi and done very well.

Similarly, if Hamilton has a bad day at the moment, then Bottas has a good chance of beating him. Such as Russia and Monaco. Admitedly those were awful weekends by Lewis. If Vettel has a bad day, instead of being 0.5 ahead of Kimi, he is just 0.1 ahead or very marginally behind. So bad days don't show up so much. The general assumption is Vettel got the most out of the more weekends than Lewis, based largely on the above.

Hamilton had this luxury also in 2008, on the off days he was a little bit better than Heikki. On normal days he thrashed him.

2008 is an important season to make note of. It shows that, even with a slightly slower car, Hamilton won the WDC largely because he and his team were focused on maximizing his points haul. By not losing points to his teammate, he was able to secure the championship despite not really being in top form that year and not having the best car. The relative weakness of your teammate is probably the most underrated element to a championship campaign. It makes a HUGE impact.

Yeah I would agree on that, the last thing you want is to be fighting your teammate, a weak teammate is not a bad thing for your own WDC campaign, Schumacher showed the way to go with that followed I would say by the likes of Alonso and Vettel.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BMWSauber84, mikeyg123 and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group