planetf1.com

It is currently Thu Dec 05, 2019 8:16 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 6:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Typo, You're not a particular champion of Mark Hughes but then will use an article of his to validate your opinion.

My problem is you can't bring forward a guy as an expert witness when half the time you think he is wrong.


I find it funny that you would question someone else's sources when half your posts quote "rumours say" or "heard around the paddock" Poker. Kind of ironic

It wasn't me questioning Mark Hughes' article.


I didn't say you were

Yes you did, it's actually Zoue that's questioning the source, a source that himself has used in the past which was the actual point I was making.
oh, good grief, are you still banging on about this? Let it go. There are times I will agree with Hughes, and times I won't. You've made your point but this is now turning into an obsession I have to say


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 6:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Johnson wrote:
We only have Kimi to judge Monza race pace. I can’t think of a race day Ferrari looked strong in if you use Kimi to judge them. Hamilton is beating him 10-1 when they both finished.
By the same token there is zero evidence to suggest the Ferrari was faster. In the race that just wasn't the case

Also you can't judge that Mercedes was faster in the race.

There's more evidence to suggest that than the other way around. Hamilton was all over Kimi and clearly could go quicker than he was doing. The only visual evidence was that the Merc was faster and after that various assumptions come into play about which driver was better and, more importantly, by how much. Saying the Ferrari was quicker requires a lot more mental arithmetic


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 7:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:
When did one race become races that Ferrari should have won?


You wrote "Mercedes had the odd race were they were quicker soon after this period but recently we are back to races that Ferrari should have won if not for the weather or Ferrari/Vettel mistakes."

Even in Singapore it's being questioned whether or not Ferrari dropped the ball, should Mark Hughes qualifying article get referenced again which I guess you didn't read even though it was featured on here?

You know Singapore is maybe a turning point for Mercedes but even then the previous 4 races Ferrari looked stronger.

they didn't look faster in the race in Monza

Faster in qualifying which last year was so, so important when determining the faster car, the faster Ferrari driver was basically out of the race after the second corner so we don't know the actual state of play, if the cars were equal in the race that still gives it to the superior qualifying of the Ferrari, again like I say playing by last years rules.
And as I've mentioned more than once qualifying does give an advantage. But at Monza Hamilton was so much quicker than Kimi and - equally importantly - significantly better on his tyres, that this became more important.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 9:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3506
That Mercedes car is so dominant, it's great watching Vettel drive the live out of the Ferrari and his done a great job of being just 40 points behind.

I don't know why you bother replying, we all know the Ferrari has been quicker, everyone in F1 knows. Using pointless stats is like looking at the results and not watching the races, trying to find any any reason to hide Vettels poor driving this year.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
F1_Ernie wrote:
That Mercedes car is so dominant, it's great watching Vettel drive the live out of the Ferrari and his done a great job of being just 40 points behind.

I don't know why you bother replying, we all know the Ferrari has been quicker, everyone in F1 knows. Using pointless stats is like looking at the results and not watching the races, trying to find any any reason to hide Vettels poor driving this year.


Who are we?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3506
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
That Mercedes car is so dominant, it's great watching Vettel drive the live out of the Ferrari and his done a great job of being just 40 points behind.

I don't know why you bother replying, we all know the Ferrari has been quicker, everyone in F1 knows. Using pointless stats is like looking at the results and not watching the races, trying to find any any reason to hide Vettels poor driving this year.


Who are we?


Pundits, drivers, reporters, anaylists and most people on forums. I have not read or heard anything regarding Mercedes being the quickest car apart from a select few on this forum. It's like you don't look at anything apart from the end results, Redbull was the fastest in China then, that also means Ferrari was the quickest car over Mercedes in Australia and Austria.

Like I say this years Mercedes is as dominant as the 2014-2016 and the way Vettel has got within 40 points of this dominant machinery is majestic driving, I can only applaud him for the miracles he has achieved.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33324
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
I find it funny that you would question someone else's sources when half your posts quote "rumours say" or "heard around the paddock" Poker. Kind of ironic

It wasn't me questioning Mark Hughes' article.


I didn't say you were

Yes you did, it's actually Zoue that's questioning the source, a source that himself has used in the past which was the actual point I was making.
oh, good grief, are you still banging on about this? Let it go. There are times I will agree with Hughes, and times I won't. You've made your point but this is now turning into an obsession I have to say

It would have been let go if Siao hadn't put his twopenneth in.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33324
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Johnson wrote:
We only have Kimi to judge Monza race pace. I can’t think of a race day Ferrari looked strong in if you use Kimi to judge them. Hamilton is beating him 10-1 when they both finished.
By the same token there is zero evidence to suggest the Ferrari was faster. In the race that just wasn't the case

Also you can't judge that Mercedes was faster in the race.

There's more evidence to suggest that than the other way around. Hamilton was all over Kimi and clearly could go quicker than he was doing. The only visual evidence was that the Merc was faster and after that various assumptions come into play about which driver was better and, more importantly, by how much. Saying the Ferrari was quicker requires a lot more mental arithmetic

I'm not saying the Ferrari was quicker in the race that would be more you saying the Mercedes was quicker in the race.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33324
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
AnRs wrote:
You wrote "Mercedes had the odd race were they were quicker soon after this period but recently we are back to races that Ferrari should have won if not for the weather or Ferrari/Vettel mistakes."

Even in Singapore it's being questioned whether or not Ferrari dropped the ball, should Mark Hughes qualifying article get referenced again which I guess you didn't read even though it was featured on here?

You know Singapore is maybe a turning point for Mercedes but even then the previous 4 races Ferrari looked stronger.

they didn't look faster in the race in Monza

Faster in qualifying which last year was so, so important when determining the faster car, the faster Ferrari driver was basically out of the race after the second corner so we don't know the actual state of play, if the cars were equal in the race that still gives it to the superior qualifying of the Ferrari, again like I say playing by last years rules.
And as I've mentioned more than once qualifying does give an advantage. But at Monza Hamilton was so much quicker than Kimi and - equally importantly - significantly better on his tyres, that this became more important.

So you would be dismissing things like Kimi destroyed his own tyres by pushing too hard on them when they were new, last year qualifying seemed to have far more importance, strange that.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 12:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7892
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Typo, You're not a particular champion of Mark Hughes but then will use an article of his to validate your opinion.

My problem is you can't bring forward a guy as an expert witness when half the time you think he is wrong.


I find it funny that you would question someone else's sources when half your posts quote "rumours say" or "heard around the paddock" Poker. Kind of ironic

It wasn't me questioning Mark Hughes' article.


I didn't say you were

Yes you did, it's actually Zoue that's questioning the source, a source that himself has used in the past which was the actual point I was making.


No I did not. You questioned Zoue's relationship with the said source and I made a point that I find it funny you questioning someone's sources.

I did not say you questioned Hughe's article, unless you have a comprehension issue with my post.

Better leave it here lest we derail this further I guess


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 1:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33324
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
I find it funny that you would question someone else's sources when half your posts quote "rumours say" or "heard around the paddock" Poker. Kind of ironic

It wasn't me questioning Mark Hughes' article.


I didn't say you were

Yes you did, it's actually Zoue that's questioning the source, a source that himself has used in the past which was the actual point I was making.


No I did not. You questioned Zoue's relationship with the said source and I made a point that I find it funny you questioning someone's sources.

I did not say you questioned Hughe's article, unless you have a comprehension issue with my post.

Better leave it here lest we derail this further I guess

I agree but one last thing I don't understand why you found it funny, I don't believe I question sources as such, I'm more like a sponge, the more sources the better.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 2:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
That Mercedes car is so dominant, it's great watching Vettel drive the live out of the Ferrari and his done a great job of being just 40 points behind.

I don't know why you bother replying, we all know the Ferrari has been quicker, everyone in F1 knows. Using pointless stats is like looking at the results and not watching the races, trying to find any any reason to hide Vettels poor driving this year.


Who are we?


Pundits, drivers, reporters, anaylists and most people on forums. I have not read or heard anything regarding Mercedes being the quickest car apart from a select few on this forum. It's like you don't look at anything apart from the end results, Redbull was the fastest in China then, that also means Ferrari was the quickest car over Mercedes in Australia and Austria.

Like I say this years Mercedes is as dominant as the 2014-2016 and the way Vettel has got within 40 points of this dominant machinery is majestic driving, I can only applaud him for the miracles he has achieved.


https://www.racefans.net/2018/08/06/201 ... -quickest/

I can show you more if you want


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 2:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7892
pokerman wrote:
I agree but one last thing I don't understand why you found it funny, I don't believe I question sources as such, I'm more like a sponge, the more sources the better.

I'm with you regarding the last sentence, the more you can support your argument with sources the better.

What I found ironic is that you are questioning other people's sources (and Hughes may not be the best source, but he is far from a biased fanboy) when you yourself in the recent past posted things that were just rumours, without even a source, just through the grapevine info that no one can check or corroborate. It is not a personal attack, just a remark, something we discussed in length back then


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 2:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3506
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
That Mercedes car is so dominant, it's great watching Vettel drive the live out of the Ferrari and his done a great job of being just 40 points behind.

I don't know why you bother replying, we all know the Ferrari has been quicker, everyone in F1 knows. Using pointless stats is like looking at the results and not watching the races, trying to find any any reason to hide Vettels poor driving this year.


Who are we?


Pundits, drivers, reporters, anaylists and most people on forums. I have not read or heard anything regarding Mercedes being the quickest car apart from a select few on this forum. It's like you don't look at anything apart from the end results, Redbull was the fastest in China then, that also means Ferrari was the quickest car over Mercedes in Australia and Austria.

Like I say this years Mercedes is as dominant as the 2014-2016 and the way Vettel has got within 40 points of this dominant machinery is majestic driving, I can only applaud him for the miracles he has achieved.


https://www.racefans.net/2018/08/06/201 ... -quickest/

I can show you more if you want


So where does it explain Mercedes has been the quicker car this season and why?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
F1_Ernie wrote:

So where does it explain Mercedes has been the quicker car this season and why?


You wrote: "I have not read or heard anything regarding Mercedes being the quickest car apart from a select few on this forum."

They wrote; Do Mercedes or Ferrari have the quickest car? Ferrari have closed the gap compared to last year and while Mercedes remain fractionally ahead, the difference between them is now negligible in average terms.

I gave you one example that contradicts your statement, ok?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3506
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

So where does it explain Mercedes has been the quicker car this season and why?


You wrote: "I have not read or heard anything regarding Mercedes being the quickest car apart from a select few on this forum."

They wrote; Do Mercedes or Ferrari have the quickest car? Ferrari have closed the gap compared to last year and while Mercedes remain fractionally ahead, the difference between them is now negligible in average terms.

I gave you one example that contradicts your statement, ok?


"Do Ferrari or Mercedes have the quickest car? It’s not clear: and that’s great for F1" - the actual headline of the article, you missed the rest of it and you can't pick one sentence from an article and put it next to the false headline and presume it's the answer :lol:

Using other quotes it sounds even more the writer believes the cars are equal or Ferrari have an edge.

"The balance is swinging from race to race depending on how their cars perform on different tracks, tyres and in different conditions. With the cars so closely matched, driver performance counts for more this year than before – something all fans of the sport surely want to see."

"In performance terms, the momentum is with Ferrari at the moment. Mercedes admit they are yet to figure out how the Scuderia has suddenly extracted more performance from its power unit.

Nonetheless, Mercedes has taken the last two victories from Ferrari on tracks where the red cars looked quicker in normal conditions. Hamilton has taken advantage of some timely showers to shore up his points lead over Sebastian Vettel in the title race. But will that be enough to withstand the expected Ferrari onslaught at the next two high-power circuits when the championship resumes?

For now at least, Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff says he welcomes the renewed threat from Ferrari. “I believe that it’s nice again to be in a situation where you are the challenger,” he said.

“Since 2013 we haven’t been the challenger anymore and it’s very difficult to set the benchmark. You’re basically running around with a cross on your back.

“And now we know where the level of performance is with the Ferrari. We’re seeing that every day on track. That is something which we are very eager and very motivated to achieve. We are not going to rest until we have done it.”

Arguably, the last four races have all been won by a car which wasn’t the quickest on the weekend. That’s another sign the competition is healthier now than it has been in recent seasons – at least at the front of the field."

"Of course there’s no chance the championship contenders will ease up the relentless pace of progress. Ferrari is fighting for its first title in 10 years; Mercedes is striving to equal Ferrari’s record of five doubles. And the latter fears it is beginning to slip behind.

“I would hope that we find the pace in the future races that we had at the beginning of the season and that’s clearly in the car which we haven’t been able to show since Austria,” said Wolff.

“At the moment they have the best package. They have a chassis that works well and an engine that has leapfrogged everybody. We were losing four tenths in the first sector [at the Hungaroring] and that is something that is very difficult to catch.”

You got to do better than that, you cant take a few words out of an article which believes the cars are equal.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33324
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I agree but one last thing I don't understand why you found it funny, I don't believe I question sources as such, I'm more like a sponge, the more sources the better.

I'm with you regarding the last sentence, the more you can support your argument with sources the better.

What I found ironic is that you are questioning other people's sources (and Hughes may not be the best source, but he is far from a biased fanboy) when you yourself in the recent past posted things that were just rumours, without even a source, just through the grapevine info that no one can check or corroborate. It is not a personal attack, just a remark, something we discussed in length back then

Can I repeat again that it was not me that questioned Hughes' article but Zoue, it's Zoue that said that Hughes is a questionable source.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33324
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
That Mercedes car is so dominant, it's great watching Vettel drive the live out of the Ferrari and his done a great job of being just 40 points behind.

I don't know why you bother replying, we all know the Ferrari has been quicker, everyone in F1 knows. Using pointless stats is like looking at the results and not watching the races, trying to find any any reason to hide Vettels poor driving this year.


Who are we?


Pundits, drivers, reporters, anaylists and most people on forums. I have not read or heard anything regarding Mercedes being the quickest car apart from a select few on this forum. It's like you don't look at anything apart from the end results, Redbull was the fastest in China then, that also means Ferrari was the quickest car over Mercedes in Australia and Austria.

Like I say this years Mercedes is as dominant as the 2014-2016 and the way Vettel has got within 40 points of this dominant machinery is majestic driving, I can only applaud him for the miracles he has achieved.


https://www.racefans.net/2018/08/06/201 ... -quickest/

I can show you more if you want


So where does it explain Mercedes has been the quicker car this season and why?

Also it's 3 races out of date but it does say that Ferrari had the quicker car in Germany and Hungary, races that Hamilton won, that's as up to date that it is, after that we had Spa were Vettel went past Hamilton and left him for dead, Hamilton was on pole because it was wet. Then Monza were Ferrari locked out the front row, a 4 race period were the Ferrari looked stronger, the article doesn't dispute that in fact it strongly starts to back it up with the first 2 races of the sequence.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33324
Joe Saward gives his thoughts on the matter, starts at 9.00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqdWRTBDVoI

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3506
pokerman wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:

Who are we?


Pundits, drivers, reporters, anaylists and most people on forums. I have not read or heard anything regarding Mercedes being the quickest car apart from a select few on this forum. It's like you don't look at anything apart from the end results, Redbull was the fastest in China then, that also means Ferrari was the quickest car over Mercedes in Australia and Austria.

Like I say this years Mercedes is as dominant as the 2014-2016 and the way Vettel has got within 40 points of this dominant machinery is majestic driving, I can only applaud him for the miracles he has achieved.


https://www.racefans.net/2018/08/06/201 ... -quickest/

I can show you more if you want


So where does it explain Mercedes has been the quicker car this season and why?

Also it's 3 races out of date but it does say that Ferrari had the quicker car in Germany and Hungary, races that Hamilton won, that's as up to date that it is, after that we had Spa were Vettel went past Hamilton and left him for dead, Hamilton was on pole because it was wet. Then Monza were Ferrari locked out the front row, a 4 race period were the Ferrari looked stronger, the article doesn't dispute that in fact it strongly starts to back it up with the first 2 races of the sequence.


Also on the second graph it shows Ferrari has been faster 7 times and Mercedes 5. I'm not still not sure how this article shows someone reporting the Mercedes has been the faster car this season.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 4:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

So where does it explain Mercedes has been the quicker car this season and why?


You wrote: "I have not read or heard anything regarding Mercedes being the quickest car apart from a select few on this forum."

They wrote; Do Mercedes or Ferrari have the quickest car? Ferrari have closed the gap compared to last year and while Mercedes remain fractionally ahead, the difference between them is now negligible in average terms.

I gave you one example that contradicts your statement, ok?


"Do Ferrari or Mercedes have the quickest car? It’s not clear: and that’s great for F1" - the actual headline of the article, you missed the rest of it and you can't pick one sentence from an article and put it next to the false headline and presume it's the answer :lol:

Using other quotes it sounds even more the writer believes the cars are equal or Ferrari have an edge.

"The balance is swinging from race to race depending on how their cars perform on different tracks, tyres and in different conditions. With the cars so closely matched, driver performance counts for more this year than before – something all fans of the sport surely want to see."

"In performance terms, the momentum is with Ferrari at the moment. Mercedes admit they are yet to figure out how the Scuderia has suddenly extracted more performance from its power unit.

Nonetheless, Mercedes has taken the last two victories from Ferrari on tracks where the red cars looked quicker in normal conditions. Hamilton has taken advantage of some timely showers to shore up his points lead over Sebastian Vettel in the title race. But will that be enough to withstand the expected Ferrari onslaught at the next two high-power circuits when the championship resumes?

For now at least, Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff says he welcomes the renewed threat from Ferrari. “I believe that it’s nice again to be in a situation where you are the challenger,” he said.

“Since 2013 we haven’t been the challenger anymore and it’s very difficult to set the benchmark. You’re basically running around with a cross on your back.

“And now we know where the level of performance is with the Ferrari. We’re seeing that every day on track. That is something which we are very eager and very motivated to achieve. We are not going to rest until we have done it.”

Arguably, the last four races have all been won by a car which wasn’t the quickest on the weekend. That’s another sign the competition is healthier now than it has been in recent seasons – at least at the front of the field."

"Of course there’s no chance the championship contenders will ease up the relentless pace of progress. Ferrari is fighting for its first title in 10 years; Mercedes is striving to equal Ferrari’s record of five doubles. And the latter fears it is beginning to slip behind.

“I would hope that we find the pace in the future races that we had at the beginning of the season and that’s clearly in the car which we haven’t been able to show since Austria,” said Wolff.

“At the moment they have the best package. They have a chassis that works well and an engine that has leapfrogged everybody. We were losing four tenths in the first sector [at the Hungaroring] and that is something that is very difficult to catch.”

You got to do better than that, you cant take a few words out of an article which believes the cars are equal.


First of all I don't have to do anything.
What part of " while Mercedes remain fractionally ahead" was hard to take in?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:58 pm
Posts: 1424
Location: London
pokerman wrote:
Joe Saward gives his thoughts on the matter, starts at 9.00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqdWRTBDVoI


Best bit of news from that is that Sky may not be bothered with CroftY in the future. Please let that bit be true!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 9:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3506
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

So where does it explain Mercedes has been the quicker car this season and why?


You wrote: "I have not read or heard anything regarding Mercedes being the quickest car apart from a select few on this forum."

They wrote; Do Mercedes or Ferrari have the quickest car? Ferrari have closed the gap compared to last year and while Mercedes remain fractionally ahead, the difference between them is now negligible in average terms.

I gave you one example that contradicts your statement, ok?


"Do Ferrari or Mercedes have the quickest car? It’s not clear: and that’s great for F1" - the actual headline of the article, you missed the rest of it and you can't pick one sentence from an article and put it next to the false headline and presume it's the answer :lol:

Using other quotes it sounds even more the writer believes the cars are equal or Ferrari have an edge.

"The balance is swinging from race to race depending on how their cars perform on different tracks, tyres and in different conditions. With the cars so closely matched, driver performance counts for more this year than before – something all fans of the sport surely want to see."

"In performance terms, the momentum is with Ferrari at the moment. Mercedes admit they are yet to figure out how the Scuderia has suddenly extracted more performance from its power unit.

Nonetheless, Mercedes has taken the last two victories from Ferrari on tracks where the red cars looked quicker in normal conditions. Hamilton has taken advantage of some timely showers to shore up his points lead over Sebastian Vettel in the title race. But will that be enough to withstand the expected Ferrari onslaught at the next two high-power circuits when the championship resumes?

For now at least, Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff says he welcomes the renewed threat from Ferrari. “I believe that it’s nice again to be in a situation where you are the challenger,” he said.

“Since 2013 we haven’t been the challenger anymore and it’s very difficult to set the benchmark. You’re basically running around with a cross on your back.

“And now we know where the level of performance is with the Ferrari. We’re seeing that every day on track. That is something which we are very eager and very motivated to achieve. We are not going to rest until we have done it.”

Arguably, the last four races have all been won by a car which wasn’t the quickest on the weekend. That’s another sign the competition is healthier now than it has been in recent seasons – at least at the front of the field."

"Of course there’s no chance the championship contenders will ease up the relentless pace of progress. Ferrari is fighting for its first title in 10 years; Mercedes is striving to equal Ferrari’s record of five doubles. And the latter fears it is beginning to slip behind.

“I would hope that we find the pace in the future races that we had at the beginning of the season and that’s clearly in the car which we haven’t been able to show since Austria,” said Wolff.

“At the moment they have the best package. They have a chassis that works well and an engine that has leapfrogged everybody. We were losing four tenths in the first sector [at the Hungaroring] and that is something that is very difficult to catch.”

You got to do better than that, you cant take a few words out of an article which believes the cars are equal.


First of all I don't have to do anything.
What part of " while Mercedes remain fractionally ahead" was hard to take in?


Do you believe after reading the article provided the writer fully believes the Mercedes is the faster car and provides evidence to back that up?

You didn't get past reading half the article like you only look at the race results. Read the whole article and it supports the cars have been equal or even Ferrari have been slightly faster. I've supplied more quotes from the article to prove this so the article doesn't support Mercedes being the faster car. Keep looking.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 9:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
F1_Ernie wrote:

Do you believe after reading the article provided the writer fully believes the Mercedes is the faster car and provides evidence to back that up?

You didn't get past reading half the article like you only look at the race results. Read the whole article and it supports the cars have been equal or even Ferrari have been slightly faster. I've supplied more quotes from the article to prove this so the article doesn't support Mercedes being the faster car. Keep looking.


This is the part I'm interested in, what evidence is there out there for a journalist do you believe ?

You can refuse the claim as much as you want he still writes that "Mercedes remain fractionally ahead".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 10:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3506
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Do you believe after reading the article provided the writer fully believes the Mercedes is the faster car and provides evidence to back that up?

You didn't get past reading half the article like you only look at the race results. Read the whole article and it supports the cars have been equal or even Ferrari have been slightly faster. I've supplied more quotes from the article to prove this so the article doesn't support Mercedes being the faster car. Keep looking.


This is the part I'm interested in, what evidence is there out there for a journalist do you believe ?

You can refuse the claim as much as you want he still writes that "Mercedes remain fractionally ahead".


The writer ends with "the difference between them is now negligible in average terms." Basically saying they are equal.

I would like a journalist who actually believes the Mercedes has been the fastest car in 2018, I don't want to read an article which has the quote you write, then the other 99% of the article is written in a way he believes the cars are equal or the Ferrari is faster. The writer himself is contradicting himself and I would rather believe 99% of the article when the headline "Do Ferrari or Mercedes have the quickest car? It’s not clear: and that’s great for F1" is being used. The writer is writing an article he believes the cars to be equal and that's great for F1, it's not an article where he believes the Mercedes is faster or it would be the theme he uses for the whole article.

This is pointless, you get proven wrong by many posters and can't have a discussion, just thought it was my turn to disregard your posts. I've used many more quotes than you from the article, keep looking. I guess that's 0 so far.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 10:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7892
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I agree but one last thing I don't understand why you found it funny, I don't believe I question sources as such, I'm more like a sponge, the more sources the better.

I'm with you regarding the last sentence, the more you can support your argument with sources the better.

What I found ironic is that you are questioning other people's sources (and Hughes may not be the best source, but he is far from a biased fanboy) when you yourself in the recent past posted things that were just rumours, without even a source, just through the grapevine info that no one can check or corroborate. It is not a personal attack, just a remark, something we discussed in length back then

Can I repeat again that it was not me that questioned Hughes' article but Zoue, it's Zoue that said that Hughes is a questionable source.


To quote you:

"My problem is you can't bring forward a guy as an expert witness when half the time you think he is wrong."

You are questioning someone's sourcing with this sentence. That sometimes he likes this source and sometimes he doesn't. Anyway, let's leave it at that


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 10:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Do you believe after reading the article provided the writer fully believes the Mercedes is the faster car and provides evidence to back that up?

You didn't get past reading half the article like you only look at the race results. Read the whole article and it supports the cars have been equal or even Ferrari have been slightly faster. I've supplied more quotes from the article to prove this so the article doesn't support Mercedes being the faster car. Keep looking.


This is the part I'm interested in, what evidence is there out there for a journalist do you believe ?

You can refuse the claim as much as you want he still writes that "Mercedes remain fractionally ahead".


The writer ends with "the difference between them is now negligible in average terms." Basically saying they are equal.

I would like a journalist who actually believes the Mercedes has been the fastest car in 2018, I don't want to read an article which has the quote you write, then the other 99% of the article is written in a way he believes the cars are equal or the Ferrari is faster. The writer himself is contradicting himself and I would rather believe 99% of the article when the headline "Do Ferrari or Mercedes have the quickest car? It’s not clear: and that’s great for F1" is being used. The writer is writing an article he believes the cars to be equal and that's great for F1, it's not an article where he believes the Mercedes is faster or it would be the theme he uses for the whole article.

This is pointless, you get proven wrong by many posters and can't have a discussion, just thought it was my turn to disregard your posts. I've used many more quotes than you from the article, keep looking. I guess that's 0 so far.


All I proved was that your claim was wrong. And you don't answer a simple question either, what evidence is there out there for a journalist do you believe ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 10:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7892
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

So where does it explain Mercedes has been the quicker car this season and why?


You wrote: "I have not read or heard anything regarding Mercedes being the quickest car apart from a select few on this forum."

They wrote; Do Mercedes or Ferrari have the quickest car? Ferrari have closed the gap compared to last year and while Mercedes remain fractionally ahead, the difference between them is now negligible in average terms.

I gave you one example that contradicts your statement, ok?


"Do Ferrari or Mercedes have the quickest car? It’s not clear: and that’s great for F1" - the actual headline of the article, you missed the rest of it and you can't pick one sentence from an article and put it next to the false headline and presume it's the answer :lol:

Using other quotes it sounds even more the writer believes the cars are equal or Ferrari have an edge.

"The balance is swinging from race to race depending on how their cars perform on different tracks, tyres and in different conditions. With the cars so closely matched, driver performance counts for more this year than before – something all fans of the sport surely want to see."

"In performance terms, the momentum is with Ferrari at the moment. Mercedes admit they are yet to figure out how the Scuderia has suddenly extracted more performance from its power unit.

Nonetheless, Mercedes has taken the last two victories from Ferrari on tracks where the red cars looked quicker in normal conditions. Hamilton has taken advantage of some timely showers to shore up his points lead over Sebastian Vettel in the title race. But will that be enough to withstand the expected Ferrari onslaught at the next two high-power circuits when the championship resumes?

For now at least, Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff says he welcomes the renewed threat from Ferrari. “I believe that it’s nice again to be in a situation where you are the challenger,” he said.

“Since 2013 we haven’t been the challenger anymore and it’s very difficult to set the benchmark. You’re basically running around with a cross on your back.

“And now we know where the level of performance is with the Ferrari. We’re seeing that every day on track. That is something which we are very eager and very motivated to achieve. We are not going to rest until we have done it.”

Arguably, the last four races have all been won by a car which wasn’t the quickest on the weekend. That’s another sign the competition is healthier now than it has been in recent seasons – at least at the front of the field."

"Of course there’s no chance the championship contenders will ease up the relentless pace of progress. Ferrari is fighting for its first title in 10 years; Mercedes is striving to equal Ferrari’s record of five doubles. And the latter fears it is beginning to slip behind.

“I would hope that we find the pace in the future races that we had at the beginning of the season and that’s clearly in the car which we haven’t been able to show since Austria,” said Wolff.

“At the moment they have the best package. They have a chassis that works well and an engine that has leapfrogged everybody. We were losing four tenths in the first sector [at the Hungaroring] and that is something that is very difficult to catch.”

You got to do better than that, you cant take a few words out of an article which believes the cars are equal.


First of all I don't have to do anything.
What part of " while Mercedes remain fractionally ahead" was hard to take in?


Do you believe after reading the article provided the writer fully believes the Mercedes is the faster car and provides evidence to back that up?

You didn't get past reading half the article like you only look at the race results. Read the whole article and it supports the cars have been equal or even Ferrari have been slightly faster. I've supplied more quotes from the article to prove this so the article doesn't support Mercedes being the faster car. Keep looking.


In fairness that one sentence does confuse things a bit...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 10:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3506
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Do you believe after reading the article provided the writer fully believes the Mercedes is the faster car and provides evidence to back that up?

You didn't get past reading half the article like you only look at the race results. Read the whole article and it supports the cars have been equal or even Ferrari have been slightly faster. I've supplied more quotes from the article to prove this so the article doesn't support Mercedes being the faster car. Keep looking.


This is the part I'm interested in, what evidence is there out there for a journalist do you believe ?

You can refuse the claim as much as you want he still writes that "Mercedes remain fractionally ahead".


The writer ends with "the difference between them is now negligible in average terms." Basically saying they are equal.

I would like a journalist who actually believes the Mercedes has been the fastest car in 2018, I don't want to read an article which has the quote you write, then the other 99% of the article is written in a way he believes the cars are equal or the Ferrari is faster. The writer himself is contradicting himself and I would rather believe 99% of the article when the headline "Do Ferrari or Mercedes have the quickest car? It’s not clear: and that’s great for F1" is being used. The writer is writing an article he believes the cars to be equal and that's great for F1, it's not an article where he believes the Mercedes is faster or it would be the theme he uses for the whole article.

This is pointless, you get proven wrong by many posters and can't have a discussion, just thought it was my turn to disregard your posts. I've used many more quotes than you from the article, keep looking. I guess that's 0 so far.


All I proved was that your claim was wrong. And you don't answer a simple question either, what evidence is there out there for a journalist do you believe ?


You need to start reading the WHOLE article and watching races.

Keeeep looking!

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 10:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Do you believe after reading the article provided the writer fully believes the Mercedes is the faster car and provides evidence to back that up?

You didn't get past reading half the article like you only look at the race results. Read the whole article and it supports the cars have been equal or even Ferrari have been slightly faster. I've supplied more quotes from the article to prove this so the article doesn't support Mercedes being the faster car. Keep looking.


This is the part I'm interested in, what evidence is there out there for a journalist do you believe ?

You can refuse the claim as much as you want he still writes that "Mercedes remain fractionally ahead".


The writer ends with "the difference between them is now negligible in average terms." Basically saying they are equal.

I would like a journalist who actually believes the Mercedes has been the fastest car in 2018, I don't want to read an article which has the quote you write, then the other 99% of the article is written in a way he believes the cars are equal or the Ferrari is faster. The writer himself is contradicting himself and I would rather believe 99% of the article when the headline "Do Ferrari or Mercedes have the quickest car? It’s not clear: and that’s great for F1" is being used. The writer is writing an article he believes the cars to be equal and that's great for F1, it's not an article where he believes the Mercedes is faster or it would be the theme he uses for the whole article.

This is pointless, you get proven wrong by many posters and can't have a discussion, just thought it was my turn to disregard your posts. I've used many more quotes than you from the article, keep looking. I guess that's 0 so far.


All I proved was that your claim was wrong. And you don't answer a simple question either, what evidence is there out there for a journalist do you believe ?


You need to start reading the WHOLE article and watching races.

Keeeep looking!


"you get proven wrong by many posters and can't have a discussion" : )


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 11:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33324
Lojik wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Joe Saward gives his thoughts on the matter, starts at 9.00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqdWRTBDVoI


Best bit of news from that is that Sky may not be bothered with CroftY in the future. Please let that bit be true!

That was your main point of interest? :lol:

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 11:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33324
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I agree but one last thing I don't understand why you found it funny, I don't believe I question sources as such, I'm more like a sponge, the more sources the better.

I'm with you regarding the last sentence, the more you can support your argument with sources the better.

What I found ironic is that you are questioning other people's sources (and Hughes may not be the best source, but he is far from a biased fanboy) when you yourself in the recent past posted things that were just rumours, without even a source, just through the grapevine info that no one can check or corroborate. It is not a personal attack, just a remark, something we discussed in length back then

Can I repeat again that it was not me that questioned Hughes' article but Zoue, it's Zoue that said that Hughes is a questionable source.


To quote you:

"My problem is you can't bring forward a guy as an expert witness when half the time you think he is wrong."

You are questioning someone's sourcing with this sentence. That sometimes he likes this source and sometimes he doesn't. Anyway, let's leave it at that

How can you use a source that you yourself believe is unreliable?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 11:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33324
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Do you believe after reading the article provided the writer fully believes the Mercedes is the faster car and provides evidence to back that up?

You didn't get past reading half the article like you only look at the race results. Read the whole article and it supports the cars have been equal or even Ferrari have been slightly faster. I've supplied more quotes from the article to prove this so the article doesn't support Mercedes being the faster car. Keep looking.


This is the part I'm interested in, what evidence is there out there for a journalist do you believe ?

You can refuse the claim as much as you want he still writes that "Mercedes remain fractionally ahead".


The writer ends with "the difference between them is now negligible in average terms." Basically saying they are equal.

I would like a journalist who actually believes the Mercedes has been the fastest car in 2018, I don't want to read an article which has the quote you write, then the other 99% of the article is written in a way he believes the cars are equal or the Ferrari is faster. The writer himself is contradicting himself and I would rather believe 99% of the article when the headline "Do Ferrari or Mercedes have the quickest car? It’s not clear: and that’s great for F1" is being used. The writer is writing an article he believes the cars to be equal and that's great for F1, it's not an article where he believes the Mercedes is faster or it would be the theme he uses for the whole article.

This is pointless, you get proven wrong by many posters and can't have a discussion, just thought it was my turn to disregard your posts. I've used many more quotes than you from the article, keep looking. I guess that's 0 so far.


All I proved was that your claim was wrong. And you don't answer a simple question either, what evidence is there out there for a journalist do you believe ?


You need to start reading the WHOLE article and watching races.

Keeeep looking!

You are wasting your time Ernie, long posts for one sentence replies.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I agree but one last thing I don't understand why you found it funny, I don't believe I question sources as such, I'm more like a sponge, the more sources the better.

I'm with you regarding the last sentence, the more you can support your argument with sources the better.

What I found ironic is that you are questioning other people's sources (and Hughes may not be the best source, but he is far from a biased fanboy) when you yourself in the recent past posted things that were just rumours, without even a source, just through the grapevine info that no one can check or corroborate. It is not a personal attack, just a remark, something we discussed in length back then

Can I repeat again that it was not me that questioned Hughes' article but Zoue, it's Zoue that said that Hughes is a questionable source.

Except that's not actually what I said


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33324
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I agree but one last thing I don't understand why you found it funny, I don't believe I question sources as such, I'm more like a sponge, the more sources the better.

I'm with you regarding the last sentence, the more you can support your argument with sources the better.

What I found ironic is that you are questioning other people's sources (and Hughes may not be the best source, but he is far from a biased fanboy) when you yourself in the recent past posted things that were just rumours, without even a source, just through the grapevine info that no one can check or corroborate. It is not a personal attack, just a remark, something we discussed in length back then

Can I repeat again that it was not me that questioned Hughes' article but Zoue, it's Zoue that said that Hughes is a questionable source.

Except that's not actually what I said

Well that's how I read it when you say you disagree with some of his conclusions.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2018 12:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I agree but one last thing I don't understand why you found it funny, I don't believe I question sources as such, I'm more like a sponge, the more sources the better.

I'm with you regarding the last sentence, the more you can support your argument with sources the better.

What I found ironic is that you are questioning other people's sources (and Hughes may not be the best source, but he is far from a biased fanboy) when you yourself in the recent past posted things that were just rumours, without even a source, just through the grapevine info that no one can check or corroborate. It is not a personal attack, just a remark, something we discussed in length back then

Can I repeat again that it was not me that questioned Hughes' article but Zoue, it's Zoue that said that Hughes is a questionable source.

Except that's not actually what I said

Well that's how I read it when you say you disagree with some of his conclusions.

I took pains to explain that on this particular occasion he had not provided any evidence to support his conclusion, so what he said was simply an opinion and I disagreed with it. On other occasions he does provide good technical background. Disagreeing with someone on occasion does not make them a "questionable source." By that argument every single pundit is a questionable source the moment you don't agree with what they say.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2018 2:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6977
Yet another twist in the tail. I think qualifying in Russia suggest that Mercedes have leapfrogged Ferrari. Merc had the car to beat today and their upgrade package has worked phenomenally well. Ferrari really are struggling with the tires but I think that Mercedes have genuinely made a substantial step forward here. Once again they are seemingly able to go into another gear in the development race that Ferrari cannot keep up with. We'll see if this is circuit-specific. Mercedes have been really strong in Russia so I'd hesitate to jump to conclusions but they had half a second out there!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2018 2:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
Vettel looks much more at ease now knowing that no matter what we have the 5th in row Merc dominating second half off The season


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16406
Merc much faster here. I hope it's just a track/tyres specific thing or we're in for a very dull end to the season.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2018 4:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5247
Seems the new rear wheel design in Spa has helped Mercedes get the best out of the rear tyres and Ferrari are struggling a bit in trying to match it, they apparently ran out of tyres across the lap in Singapore and can't seem to get what Mercedes can get out of them now.

New front wing and other upgrades working well while Ferrari's didn't this weekend helped put them over the top here as well I'd imagine.

_________________
"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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: JN23, Schumacher forever#1 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