planetf1.com

I'm wondering just exactly how do you measure that?

Stop Press: Vettel wins yet another title in the best car which seems to take a special talent when he does it?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

Indeed and the space closes even more before Kimi hits him, if the stills roll on Vettel's trajectory takes him right across Kimi's car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

Poker, is there no such thing as a racing incident when it comes to your view of Vettel?

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15

well, right back at you. The object for you has always been to pin blame

Did I say that Vettel should have been penalised though?

Racing incidents in themselves are caused by over aggressive driving, Vettel was over aggressive and sometimes that doesn't pay off, I question the Vettel was blameless stance that some take for him and I'm only really stating what many journalists think and drivers like Ricciardo, many list what Vettel did as a mistake.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

When I think something that is backed up by several journalists then why should i let the Vettel did nothing wrong stance go?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15

_________________
- Mod Team

anyone can use the appeal to authority stance. Even Hamilton, who's usually your bible in these things, thought it was just a racing incident. So which authority is higher?

Use your own opinion, not others. The fact remains that without Kimi's presence up the inside - who it's at the very least debatable that Vettel could see, or even expect - Vettel left Max more than sufficient space. It needed Kimi - who, incidentally, also had plenty of room on his inside - to also squeeze from the other side for the accident to happen.

I know that you blamed Kimi before, bringing forward evidence of what you believed to be a slight deviation in the direction of his car towards Verstappen's car which I for one couldn't see, but what was much more obvious was the massive deviation of Vettel's car towards the two cars on his inside which apparently had no bearing on the subsequent collision.

It is my opinion that Vettel contributed to the collision and when I see people that get paid for their opinions say the same as me then why should I keep quiet when I continue to hear the Vettel was blameless line?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

I'll just refer you back to my previous post

To me that was a racing incident. That being said, I'm sure Vetel would do it differently if he could have a do over and hopefully (for him) he will have learned something from it (that when you are fighting for a title late in the season against drivers who are aggressive and are not fighting for the title do not expect them to give way to an aggressive move). In this case he could not know that Kimi was to the left of Verstappen, however if Kimi wasn't there, where was he? I'm a Hamilton fan, but to me Vetel here was no worse than when Hamilton came together with PM - and the coming together with PM was arguably worse since PM was known for his lack of consideration (or talent) and it was later in the race and it was known that PM was there. I think Hamilton learned from that racing incident though. We will see if Vetel did the same.

Yes it was a racing incident but Vettel was not blameless, in fact these past couple of years we've seen Vettel have some form for this on race starts by squeezing cars on his inside and causing an incident.

The comparison with Maldonado and Verstappen and picking your battles is very apt although the two incidents are entirely different, Verstappen became a passenger whereas Maldonado very much retaliated as he was prone to do with the red mist descending, that's why Maldonado got penalised.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

After the 2012 season, Hamilton said that he learnt that you need to remember who you're racing against. We saw that this season where he didn't fight hard with MV at Hungary and Malaysia.

Vettel on the other hand had 3 start line incidents with MV.

Inappropriate post removed.

Lewis definitely gave an interview in the middle of 2012 with Brundle where Brundle asked how is Alonso leading the championship etc..and he said one thing he'd learned from Alonso's first half was to choose battles more wisely and focus on pocketing points (I'm paraphrasing, can't recall verbatim). I think he was referencing the Pastor clash which was a fight over about 3pts difference on worn tyres while Alonso had been overtaken half a dozen times in the last 10 laps that year but just kept pocketing the points he could.

And to be fair to Lewis there hasn't been many times since then I've felt he's chosen wrong. 1 against Bottas in 2013 in Brazil I think, 1 against Nico in Spain 2016 and 1 against Dan in Hungary in I think 2015. So 3 in 5 and a half seasons for me since that interview whereas he probably had double that at least in the year and a half before that interview.

_________________
"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

That's the first time I've heard that, I think that was a problem for him not realising that some drivers are quite happy to have a crash or just lack judgement in wheel to wheel combat.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

Bottas was trying to unlap himself on fresh tyres and Hamilton should have just let him go, it cost him a podium I believe?

Against Rosberg that's a direct fight for a title so that's a battle that had to be fought plus Rosberg's car was down on power so why shouldn't he go for the pass, Rosberg chose to chop across Hamilton and put him off the track.

Ricciardo was a driving error whilst trying to defend his position on cold and inferior tyres, Rosberg was in front of him at that time so I think he panicked a bit.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

Yes,why not? If Bottas is faster then he's not going to interfere in Lewis's race if he unlaps himself and if he's slower then Lewis can pass him back. Why fight someone a lap down?

Spain is the only Ham-Ros contact I thought Lewis chose wrong but I can see the counter arguments. I thought it was a racing incident myself and thought both could have done something different to avoid it. This is the one Merc felt Lewis shared blame in too.

Yeah it was a brainfade.


Placing blame in the incidents wasn't really the point though, I don't blame him for the Pastor crash in Valencia for example but I don't think he should have fought him in the first place so it's more about choosing your battles and I think since that clash he's arguably done it better than anyone. (It was supposed to be a compliment).

_________________
"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

I did say that he should have let Bottas pass.

Rosberg's engine was down on power so what do you do, Rosberg decided Hamilton was not going by no matter what.

I think the problem for Hamilton was that he knew only one way to race and that was flat out, race hard but don't crash anyone out and I actually believe he's not come across drivers who basically just don't care certainly not at the highest level anyway.

It's certainly a different Hamilton that raced against Verstappen in Malaysia, he picked his fights, and with that in mind Vettel often resembled Hamilton of old last year, he was far more aggressive than Hamilton and didn't pick his battles and like Hamilton before him came unstuck.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

Spain's been done to death so happy to agree to disagree on that one.

Well mistakes happen of course, I don't think it's a case of every time there was contact before 2012 it was a case of someone else doing wrong every time because they were happy to crash. Running out of talent would account for most of them rather than anyone being happy to end their race in that way I would say.

It is and he was practically flawless last year, perfect example of choosing your battles in both Hungary and Malaysia and yeah Seb didn't basically (imo).

_________________
"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

Well I guess we will just put Rosberg's sharp turn to the right down to a nervous twitch rather than looking in his mirrors to see which way Hamilton was going to go?

The reference to contact is that I believe that some drivers don't mind it even it means some bodywork damage.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

You can put it down to whatever you want, it's not going to change my mind on it. Why do you think it was the only contact Mercedes (Toto or Niki, can't recall specifics) pointed a finger at Lewis for if it's as open and shut as you like to make out?

Or a lack of talent or a bit of both at times.

_________________
"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

I saw one car veer sharply across the track and force the other car off the track it was as simple as that.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

It's never as simple as that which is why Mercedes saw it differently.

_________________
"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

Hamilton has won 3 out of his 4 WDCs with the outright best car. In the one WDC he won without the best car, his main competitor was Massa. I'm fairly confident that Vettel would have won the WDC in the 2008 McLaren if his main competitor was Massa.

I don't think we will ever see Hamilton drive with a proper car handicap again. His contract runs out in 2020, and we will have the same engine regulations until then.

However, we saw enough of how Hamilton coped with a car handicap from 2009-2013. He was good, but no Senna or Schumacher.

TBF he competed for the championship in 2010 which was very good, that being said Vettel wasn't at his peak and it was one of Alonso's poorer seasons.

The trouble with all these conversations is that there is almost noway Hamilton (or any driver) can win a championship and there detractors admit he had a car deficit. If a car wins the championship people are generally inclined to label it the best car or that the opposition was unlucky/made to many mistakes etc. Especially if they don't rate the driver that won. It's a circular conversation. How good you think the driver is directly reflects on how you rate his car.

I can't think of any situation where a driver has won the championship with the car/driver package looking generally faster than the opposition but people crediting the driver for that speed advantage rather than the car.


Edit - It's amazing to think that if you swap Hamilton/Vettel and Palmer last season they would probably have met in the middle. Drivers can make such a difference and yet there speed is so rarely factored in when discussing car pace.

What did they do with a car handicap that he didn't?

_________________
"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

Generally his performances were good but not on the level of Schumacher's 95, 97 or 98.

I think his 2009 and especially 2012 could be compared favourably to 95 and 97 but I'd agree with 98 being slightly better. The problem for Lewis and indeed Alonso who's own 2012 tops even Schumacher's '98 for me, is that they had more competition and a better driver sitting in the best car in Seb so there were fewer scraps to be fought over and what was being fought over was being split by Web/But/Ham/Rai and Alonso instead of just Michael feeding on plenty of scraps from Hill/JV and then Hak/DC.

Put Hill in the RB and have McLaren as the clear 2nd best car and team built around Lewis like 08/09 with no Alonso on the grid and I think we'd view it pretty differently and Lewis would have picked up a couple of those titles too.

_________________
"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

I'm with you to a point, but the gap between the leading cars and Renault was just too much. I'd give Hamilton and Vettel a tenth or two on Hulk, but at that I don't think Hulk ever qualified even within a second of the Ferrari or Merc. Palmer in the Merc would probably have been routinely qualifying sixth behind all the other top cars but still ahead of the midfield, and I don't see Hamilton taking the Renault all that much higher than Hulk did, tbh.

The driver does indeed make more of a difference than some people give them credit for, but I don't believe they can bridge the gap between midfield and top teams in the modern day - if indeed they ever could.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)

Swapping Hamilton and Palmer last year would have created at least a 2 second swing. I reckon they'd be fighting over the back end of the top 6.

I think the top teams end up with the top drivers so they end up looking even more like top teams. If Red Bull had midfield drivers I think they would have looked upper midfield in the first half of last season. They have better drivers than the rest of the midfield so they can drag themselves out of it even if the car is only just a little quicker. (I actually think the Red Bull started last season with about the same pace as the Williams but they developed away from each other).

I don't think so. I reckon yes, Palmer would consistently be near the back of the top six, but I don't think Lewis could take that Renault into contention for those top six places. Looking at a sample of Palmer's last five races with Renault, and assuming that he's a full second a lap slower than Hamilton (which I don't honestly think he would have been - there would have been times where he was a lot closer, but I've made it a whole second throughout):

NOTE: Since Palmer rarely made Q3, I actually just took 2 tenths off Hulk's numbers for this simulation.

---

Singapore
Hamilton (Renault) 1:40.8 - P6
Palmer (Mercedes) 1:41.1 - P7

In Singapore, Mercedes' worst track and possibly Renault's best, Lewis does actually manage to get into the top six, with his teammate Hulkenberg right behind him. Palmer is out-qualified by both Renault cars.

Italy
Palmer (Mercedes) 1:36.5 - P1
Hamilton (Renault) 1:37.8 - P11

Hamilton's gap over the field was so huge that Palmer is still on pole, with Lewis unable to break into Q3. This is a bit of a weird one, however, and I think Palmer would probably have been more than his usual gap slower than Hamilton here.

Belgium
Palmer (Mercedes) 1:43.5 - P5
Hamilton (Renault) 1:44.7 - P7

Hamilton once again qualifies right ahead of Hulk at the top of the midfield, while Palmer splits the Bulls, half a second back from his Mercedes teammate.

Hungary
Hamilton (Renault) 1:17.2 - P6
Palmer (Mercedes) 1:17.7 - P9

In a shocking display, Palmer would have qualified his Mercedes all the way down in 9th for the Hungaroring (although it should be noted that this was a poor performance for Hamilton, being outqualified by Bottas).

Great Britain
Palmer (Mercedes) 1:27.6 - P4
Hamilton (Renault) 1:28.6 - P6

At this power track, Hamilton has no answer for Palmer, who still manages to out-qualify everyone who isn't a Mercedes or Ferrari.

---

Okay, so it was actually closer than I would have thought. But this isn't swapping an average midfield driver with Hamilton - this is swapping a man who was universally considered unfit for F1 with Hamilton.

If you swapped Hamilton and a mediocre driver, you'd just get a Ferrari WDC and that driver would be safely in the top six most every race.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)

What did they see in Austria?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

The comparison was with Vettel and Vettel won 3 of his 4 WDC's in the outright best car so I'm not sure what you are trying to prove?

Why the comparison with Schumacher and Senna, I never made the comparison in the first place?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

Indeed good reply.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

I'm not quite sure how assembled these numbers but Italy must surely be wrong you seem to be giving Palmer the wet weather ability of Hamilton putting Palmer on pole whilst Bottas qualified around P7 I believe?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

I thought they blamed Nico,no?

(And by they I mean Toto or Niki still)

_________________
"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

To be honest I can't remember, all I remember is Hamilton feeling the need to tell the team that Rosberg hit him and then the initial claim from Lauda that Hamilton hit Rosberg's car when he tried to rejoin the track which damaged Rosberg's car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

As you'll notice if you read my post...


I got the numbers by simply adding a second to Lewis' time in every session, on the assumption that Palmer is a second slower. Lewis was on pole by over a second in Italy, so that gives Palmer the pole as well. I noted that I think it's a fluke result, as indeed I think Lewis' 1.2 second gap over Verstappen was a fluke. I do not believe that Hamilton is that much faster than Verstappen in the wet, so it must have come down to more than just driver ability.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)