planetf1.com

It is currently Fri Nov 16, 2018 11:18 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1922
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
What we're seeing here is that some people are entirely happy to completely disregard the words of the actual Mercedes team principle about the competitive strength of his car...

Why are you so invested in the idea that the Ferrari was the dominant car in the first half? Hamilton obviously out-drove Vettel whether or not that's true.

Giving Silverstone to Mercedes still makes it 9-5 to Ferrari going into Singapore, if you are wanting to give Monza to Mercedes like Zoue is then like Zoue that's just trying as hard as possible to not put Vettel in the best car, that's the actual game in hand although you seem to see it as being the opposite.

I don't care whether Vettel was in the best car. I'm quite happy to acknowledge that Hamilton beat him fair and square, so it's not really relevant.

It's not a question of wanting to give Monza to Mercedes. I'm pointing out that what seems to be taken as a basic fact by some on here is actually up for question even among the experts.

What I see is the advantage yo-yoing between Ferrari and Mercedes depending on track. From France on, Mercedes entered a period where they were quicker, while from Germany to Spa it was Ferrari who looked to have the better car. Yet some people have taken that run to somehow paint a picture that the Ferrari was almost always quicker and it's just not true. And in any event the majority of the time most of the differences were tiny and in some cases it's not all that clear cut anyway. This idea that one car had a clear and consistent advantage across the entire season to date is just wrong

The thing is that nobody has said that, saying the Ferrari was the fastest car doesn't mean it was the fastest car in every race it just means it was faster more often than not, if people had the view that it had a clear and consistent advantage then the word dominant would start to get used, I've not seen one person say that.

well that's not really true, though, is it, because saying it was the fastest car until Singapore gives the one-sided impression that it was fastest throughout the year, and as I have just shown things were pretty even up until Silverstone, after which Ferrari began to pull ahead. It was only really during the summer that they began to show any kind of consistent advantage, and that stopped in Italy. I wouldn't have a problem if people were talking about Ferrari being the fastest car over the summer, but otherwise it's just misleading.

I remember reading an article over the summer where James Allison was saying that the differences between the cars were pretty marginal. Ferrari appeared to have the advantage on the faster corners and the straights, whereas the Mercedes was better in the twisty bits. And even there he stressed that these differences were pretty tiny overall and it was very much track dependent as to who would come out on top. Yet listening to some people on here Hamilton's been fighting an uphill battle throughout the year and that's far removed from the truth. I don't have a problem saying Hamilton aced it when Ferrari did appear to have the upper hand in the summer, but I don't think we need to paint a distorted picture for the rest of the season


Was the article referencing this debrief? If so then the details are slightly wrong, but indeed he saw it as very close after the Hungarian GP.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9NbkUnAZkM

~9 minutes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 11:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3074
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
What we're seeing here is that some people are entirely happy to completely disregard the words of the actual Mercedes team principle about the competitive strength of his car...

Why are you so invested in the idea that the Ferrari was the dominant car in the first half? Hamilton obviously out-drove Vettel whether or not that's true.

Giving Silverstone to Mercedes still makes it 9-5 to Ferrari going into Singapore, if you are wanting to give Monza to Mercedes like Zoue is then like Zoue that's just trying as hard as possible to not put Vettel in the best car, that's the actual game in hand although you seem to see it as being the opposite.

I don't care whether Vettel was in the best car. I'm quite happy to acknowledge that Hamilton beat him fair and square, so it's not really relevant.

It's not a question of wanting to give Monza to Mercedes. I'm pointing out that what seems to be taken as a basic fact by some on here is actually up for question even among the experts.

What I see is the advantage yo-yoing between Ferrari and Mercedes depending on track. From France on, Mercedes entered a period where they were quicker, while from Germany to Spa it was Ferrari who looked to have the better car. Yet some people have taken that run to somehow paint a picture that the Ferrari was almost always quicker and it's just not true. And in any event the majority of the time most of the differences were tiny and in some cases it's not all that clear cut anyway. This idea that one car had a clear and consistent advantage across the entire season to date is just wrong

The thing is that nobody has said that, saying the Ferrari was the fastest car doesn't mean it was the fastest car in every race it just means it was faster more often than not, if people had the view that it had a clear and consistent advantage then the word dominant would start to get used, I've not seen one person say that.

well that's not really true, though, is it, because saying it was the fastest car until Singapore gives the one-sided impression that it was fastest throughout the year, and as I have just shown things were pretty even up until Silverstone, after which Ferrari began to pull ahead. It was only really during the summer that they began to show any kind of consistent advantage, and that stopped in Italy. I wouldn't have a problem if people were talking about Ferrari being the fastest car over the summer, but otherwise it's just misleading.

I remember reading an article over the summer where James Allison was saying that the differences between the cars were pretty marginal. Ferrari appeared to have the advantage on the faster corners and the straights, whereas the Mercedes was better in the twisty bits. And even there he stressed that these differences were pretty tiny overall and it was very much track dependent as to who would come out on top. Yet listening to some people on here Hamilton's been fighting an uphill battle throughout the year and that's far removed from the truth. I don't have a problem saying Hamilton aced it when Ferrari did appear to have the upper hand in the summer, but I don't think we need to paint a distorted picture for the rest of the season


Can you stop with this rubbish please, you know exactly what I mean when I say Ferrari had the faster car up until Singapore, I have explained it so many times. Everyone else knows what I mean apart from you, are you just making a argument for the sake of if? Do you really think I mean Ferrari had the best car from Aus to Monza? Come on now.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 12:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Giving Silverstone to Mercedes still makes it 9-5 to Ferrari going into Singapore, if you are wanting to give Monza to Mercedes like Zoue is then like Zoue that's just trying as hard as possible to not put Vettel in the best car, that's the actual game in hand although you seem to see it as being the opposite.

I don't care whether Vettel was in the best car. I'm quite happy to acknowledge that Hamilton beat him fair and square, so it's not really relevant.

It's not a question of wanting to give Monza to Mercedes. I'm pointing out that what seems to be taken as a basic fact by some on here is actually up for question even among the experts.

What I see is the advantage yo-yoing between Ferrari and Mercedes depending on track. From France on, Mercedes entered a period where they were quicker, while from Germany to Spa it was Ferrari who looked to have the better car. Yet some people have taken that run to somehow paint a picture that the Ferrari was almost always quicker and it's just not true. And in any event the majority of the time most of the differences were tiny and in some cases it's not all that clear cut anyway. This idea that one car had a clear and consistent advantage across the entire season to date is just wrong

The thing is that nobody has said that, saying the Ferrari was the fastest car doesn't mean it was the fastest car in every race it just means it was faster more often than not, if people had the view that it had a clear and consistent advantage then the word dominant would start to get used, I've not seen one person say that.

well that's not really true, though, is it, because saying it was the fastest car until Singapore gives the one-sided impression that it was fastest throughout the year, and as I have just shown things were pretty even up until Silverstone, after which Ferrari began to pull ahead. It was only really during the summer that they began to show any kind of consistent advantage, and that stopped in Italy. I wouldn't have a problem if people were talking about Ferrari being the fastest car over the summer, but otherwise it's just misleading.

I remember reading an article over the summer where James Allison was saying that the differences between the cars were pretty marginal. Ferrari appeared to have the advantage on the faster corners and the straights, whereas the Mercedes was better in the twisty bits. And even there he stressed that these differences were pretty tiny overall and it was very much track dependent as to who would come out on top. Yet listening to some people on here Hamilton's been fighting an uphill battle throughout the year and that's far removed from the truth. I don't have a problem saying Hamilton aced it when Ferrari did appear to have the upper hand in the summer, but I don't think we need to paint a distorted picture for the rest of the season


Can you stop with this rubbish please, you know exactly what I mean when I say Ferrari had the faster car up until Singapore, I have explained it so many times. Everyone else knows what I mean apart from you, are you just making a argument for the sake of if? Do you really think I mean Ferrari had the best car from Aus to Monza? Come on now.

The way you've said it is open to a different interpretation. Why not make it more reflective of what you mean, then? If you'd said Ferrari had edged ahead during the summer but now Mercedes is clawing it back, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 12:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Clearly, it was an exaggeration. But I've seen people try to say Ferrari was better at every single track except for Australia. Including Austria, which is absurd.

I've not seen one person say that, who are these people?

This would be the one:

Johnson wrote:
Mercedes was very strong in France indeed but both cars DNF'd in Austria. You have to factor in the reliability if you are talking the car overall and not just the speed.

How is that an example when he also gives France to Mercedes and queries just one track that was given to Mercedes that being Austria, how do you extrapolate from that, that he gives every track to Ferrari apart from Australia?

_________________
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 Oct 14, 2018 12:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3074
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Can you stop with this rubbish please, you know exactly what I mean when I say Ferrari had the faster car up until Singapore, I have explained it so many times. Everyone else knows what I mean apart from you, are you just making a argument for the sake of if? Do you really think I mean Ferrari had the best car from Aus to Monza? Come on now.

The way you've said it is open to a different interpretation. Why not make it more reflective of what you mean, then? If you'd said Ferrari had edged ahead during the summer but now Mercedes is clawing it back, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.


It's only you who has decided to interpret what I said the way you did, it was pretty obvious what I meant. This was discussed days ago which i explained everything in more detail which then you complained at Poker for not leaving it and now your still going on about this days later.

You are the one who has misunderstood this wrong and still discussing it days later for some reason.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 1:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
What we're seeing here is that some people are entirely happy to completely disregard the words of the actual Mercedes team principle about the competitive strength of his car...

Why are you so invested in the idea that the Ferrari was the dominant car in the first half? Hamilton obviously out-drove Vettel whether or not that's true.

Giving Silverstone to Mercedes still makes it 9-5 to Ferrari going into Singapore, if you are wanting to give Monza to Mercedes like Zoue is then like Zoue that's just trying as hard as possible to not put Vettel in the best car, that's the actual game in hand although you seem to see it as being the opposite.

I don't care whether Vettel was in the best car. I'm quite happy to acknowledge that Hamilton beat him fair and square, so it's not really relevant.

It's not a question of wanting to give Monza to Mercedes. I'm pointing out that what seems to be taken as a basic fact by some on here is actually up for question even among the experts.

What I see is the advantage yo-yoing between Ferrari and Mercedes depending on track. From France on, Mercedes entered a period where they were quicker, while from Germany to Spa it was Ferrari who looked to have the better car. Yet some people have taken that run to somehow paint a picture that the Ferrari was almost always quicker and it's just not true. And in any event the majority of the time most of the differences were tiny and in some cases it's not all that clear cut anyway. This idea that one car had a clear and consistent advantage across the entire season to date is just wrong

The thing is that nobody has said that, saying the Ferrari was the fastest car doesn't mean it was the fastest car in every race it just means it was faster more often than not, if people had the view that it had a clear and consistent advantage then the word dominant would start to get used, I've not seen one person say that.

well that's not really true, though, is it, because saying it was the fastest car until Singapore gives the one-sided impression that it was fastest throughout the year, and as I have just shown things were pretty even up until Silverstone, after which Ferrari began to pull ahead. It was only really during the summer that they began to show any kind of consistent advantage, and that stopped in Italy. I wouldn't have a problem if people were talking about Ferrari being the fastest car over the summer, but otherwise it's just misleading.

I remember reading an article over the summer where James Allison was saying that the differences between the cars were pretty marginal. Ferrari appeared to have the advantage on the faster corners and the straights, whereas the Mercedes was better in the twisty bits. And even there he stressed that these differences were pretty tiny overall and it was very much track dependent as to who would come out on top. Yet listening to some people on here Hamilton's been fighting an uphill battle throughout the year and that's far removed from the truth. I don't have a problem saying Hamilton aced it when Ferrari did appear to have the upper hand in the summer, but I don't think we need to paint a distorted picture for the rest of the season

No it just means that Ferrari were more often faster, I'm aghast that you don't understand that simple concept and turn it into a global Ferrari was faster every time out.

It was pretty even up until Silverstone but that's not what you were saying when I joined the debate just before Singapore were you was saying it was pretty even up until that point.

As for Italy Ferrari quite easily locked out the front row even with driving errors from Vettel and then threw the race on the opening lap when Vettel, the faster driver spun, which allowed Mercedes to team up on Kimi.

It is small margins that has many times defined which is the faster car, small margins were some people say let's call it even, but then there are people with tools at their disposal that we don't have like GPS data that can actually measure which is the faster car, using science bereft of any kind of bias, also everything I have read give the opinion that Ferrari have had the edge.

As an overview going forward into next year I will continue to believe science more than personal opinion, in particular personal opinion that has shown a level of bias in the past.

_________________
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 Oct 14, 2018 1:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I don't care whether Vettel was in the best car. I'm quite happy to acknowledge that Hamilton beat him fair and square, so it's not really relevant.

It's not a question of wanting to give Monza to Mercedes. I'm pointing out that what seems to be taken as a basic fact by some on here is actually up for question even among the experts.

What I see is the advantage yo-yoing between Ferrari and Mercedes depending on track. From France on, Mercedes entered a period where they were quicker, while from Germany to Spa it was Ferrari who looked to have the better car. Yet some people have taken that run to somehow paint a picture that the Ferrari was almost always quicker and it's just not true. And in any event the majority of the time most of the differences were tiny and in some cases it's not all that clear cut anyway. This idea that one car had a clear and consistent advantage across the entire season to date is just wrong

The thing is that nobody has said that, saying the Ferrari was the fastest car doesn't mean it was the fastest car in every race it just means it was faster more often than not, if people had the view that it had a clear and consistent advantage then the word dominant would start to get used, I've not seen one person say that.

well that's not really true, though, is it, because saying it was the fastest car until Singapore gives the one-sided impression that it was fastest throughout the year, and as I have just shown things were pretty even up until Silverstone, after which Ferrari began to pull ahead. It was only really during the summer that they began to show any kind of consistent advantage, and that stopped in Italy. I wouldn't have a problem if people were talking about Ferrari being the fastest car over the summer, but otherwise it's just misleading.

I remember reading an article over the summer where James Allison was saying that the differences between the cars were pretty marginal. Ferrari appeared to have the advantage on the faster corners and the straights, whereas the Mercedes was better in the twisty bits. And even there he stressed that these differences were pretty tiny overall and it was very much track dependent as to who would come out on top. Yet listening to some people on here Hamilton's been fighting an uphill battle throughout the year and that's far removed from the truth. I don't have a problem saying Hamilton aced it when Ferrari did appear to have the upper hand in the summer, but I don't think we need to paint a distorted picture for the rest of the season


Can you stop with this rubbish please, you know exactly what I mean when I say Ferrari had the faster car up until Singapore, I have explained it so many times. Everyone else knows what I mean apart from you, are you just making a argument for the sake of if? Do you really think I mean Ferrari had the best car from Aus to Monza? Come on now.

The way you've said it is open to a different interpretation. Why not make it more reflective of what you mean, then? If you'd said Ferrari had edged ahead during the summer but now Mercedes is clawing it back, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

It seemed to me that only you read it that way and even after it was explained what was meant here we are with you cycling back to it to create a false narrative.

_________________
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 Oct 14, 2018 1:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Can you stop with this rubbish please, you know exactly what I mean when I say Ferrari had the faster car up until Singapore, I have explained it so many times. Everyone else knows what I mean apart from you, are you just making a argument for the sake of if? Do you really think I mean Ferrari had the best car from Aus to Monza? Come on now.

The way you've said it is open to a different interpretation. Why not make it more reflective of what you mean, then? If you'd said Ferrari had edged ahead during the summer but now Mercedes is clawing it back, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.


It's only you who has decided to interpret what I said the way you did, it was pretty obvious what I meant. This was discussed days ago which i explained everything in more detail which then you complained at Poker for not leaving it and now your still going on about this days later.

You are the one who has misunderstood this wrong and still discussing it days later for some reason.

Yep and I was apparently the bad guy for not leaving it alone after the misinterpretation was sorted out but apparently it never was, strange?

_________________
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 Oct 14, 2018 2:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3074
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... te-floppt/

Interesting article regarding Mercedes updates and how Ferrari have gone backwards. Mercedes updates have made gains of less than 2 tenths. Ferrari have gone backwards and Red bulls performance has stayed the same to Mercedes but got smaller to Ferrari. Seems Ferraei have also lost performance to their customer teams.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 3:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
The thing is that nobody has said that, saying the Ferrari was the fastest car doesn't mean it was the fastest car in every race it just means it was faster more often than not, if people had the view that it had a clear and consistent advantage then the word dominant would start to get used, I've not seen one person say that.

well that's not really true, though, is it, because saying it was the fastest car until Singapore gives the one-sided impression that it was fastest throughout the year, and as I have just shown things were pretty even up until Silverstone, after which Ferrari began to pull ahead. It was only really during the summer that they began to show any kind of consistent advantage, and that stopped in Italy. I wouldn't have a problem if people were talking about Ferrari being the fastest car over the summer, but otherwise it's just misleading.

I remember reading an article over the summer where James Allison was saying that the differences between the cars were pretty marginal. Ferrari appeared to have the advantage on the faster corners and the straights, whereas the Mercedes was better in the twisty bits. And even there he stressed that these differences were pretty tiny overall and it was very much track dependent as to who would come out on top. Yet listening to some people on here Hamilton's been fighting an uphill battle throughout the year and that's far removed from the truth. I don't have a problem saying Hamilton aced it when Ferrari did appear to have the upper hand in the summer, but I don't think we need to paint a distorted picture for the rest of the season


Can you stop with this rubbish please, you know exactly what I mean when I say Ferrari had the faster car up until Singapore, I have explained it so many times. Everyone else knows what I mean apart from you, are you just making a argument for the sake of if? Do you really think I mean Ferrari had the best car from Aus to Monza? Come on now.

The way you've said it is open to a different interpretation. Why not make it more reflective of what you mean, then? If you'd said Ferrari had edged ahead during the summer but now Mercedes is clawing it back, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

It seemed to me that only you read it that way and even after it was explained what was meant here we are with you cycling back to it to create a false narrative.

No I don't think that's true


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 3:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Giving Silverstone to Mercedes still makes it 9-5 to Ferrari going into Singapore, if you are wanting to give Monza to Mercedes like Zoue is then like Zoue that's just trying as hard as possible to not put Vettel in the best car, that's the actual game in hand although you seem to see it as being the opposite.

I don't care whether Vettel was in the best car. I'm quite happy to acknowledge that Hamilton beat him fair and square, so it's not really relevant.

It's not a question of wanting to give Monza to Mercedes. I'm pointing out that what seems to be taken as a basic fact by some on here is actually up for question even among the experts.

What I see is the advantage yo-yoing between Ferrari and Mercedes depending on track. From France on, Mercedes entered a period where they were quicker, while from Germany to Spa it was Ferrari who looked to have the better car. Yet some people have taken that run to somehow paint a picture that the Ferrari was almost always quicker and it's just not true. And in any event the majority of the time most of the differences were tiny and in some cases it's not all that clear cut anyway. This idea that one car had a clear and consistent advantage across the entire season to date is just wrong

The thing is that nobody has said that, saying the Ferrari was the fastest car doesn't mean it was the fastest car in every race it just means it was faster more often than not, if people had the view that it had a clear and consistent advantage then the word dominant would start to get used, I've not seen one person say that.

well that's not really true, though, is it, because saying it was the fastest car until Singapore gives the one-sided impression that it was fastest throughout the year, and as I have just shown things were pretty even up until Silverstone, after which Ferrari began to pull ahead. It was only really during the summer that they began to show any kind of consistent advantage, and that stopped in Italy. I wouldn't have a problem if people were talking about Ferrari being the fastest car over the summer, but otherwise it's just misleading.

I remember reading an article over the summer where James Allison was saying that the differences between the cars were pretty marginal. Ferrari appeared to have the advantage on the faster corners and the straights, whereas the Mercedes was better in the twisty bits. And even there he stressed that these differences were pretty tiny overall and it was very much track dependent as to who would come out on top. Yet listening to some people on here Hamilton's been fighting an uphill battle throughout the year and that's far removed from the truth. I don't have a problem saying Hamilton aced it when Ferrari did appear to have the upper hand in the summer, but I don't think we need to paint a distorted picture for the rest of the season

No it just means that Ferrari were more often faster, I'm aghast that you don't understand that simple concept and turn it into a global Ferrari was faster every time out.

It was pretty even up until Silverstone but that's not what you were saying when I joined the debate just before Singapore were you was saying it was pretty even up until that point.

As for Italy Ferrari quite easily locked out the front row even with driving errors from Vettel and then threw the race on the opening lap when Vettel, the faster driver spun, which allowed Mercedes to team up on Kimi.

It is small margins that has many times defined which is the faster car, small margins were some people say let's call it even, but then there are people with tools at their disposal that we don't have like GPS data that can actually measure which is the faster car, using science bereft of any kind of bias, also everything I have read give the opinion that Ferrari have had the edge.

As an overview going forward into next year I will continue to believe science more than personal opinion, in particular personal opinion that has shown a level of bias in the past.

I hardly think you are in a position to call anyone else out on bias. You who a short while ago treated two almost identical qualifying scenarios at Singapore differently depending on which driver was involved.

You act as though the science you are so fond of quoting is infallible, but when even the experts don't agree that's clearly not the case. And I've been arguing for months that the cars have been relatively equal, whereas you and others have been desperate to portray the Ferrari as having an advantage. If we can agree now that overall the cars have been well matched this year so far, with minor track-dependent differences, then we actually have a consensus


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 3:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Can you stop with this rubbish please, you know exactly what I mean when I say Ferrari had the faster car up until Singapore, I have explained it so many times. Everyone else knows what I mean apart from you, are you just making a argument for the sake of if? Do you really think I mean Ferrari had the best car from Aus to Monza? Come on now.

The way you've said it is open to a different interpretation. Why not make it more reflective of what you mean, then? If you'd said Ferrari had edged ahead during the summer but now Mercedes is clawing it back, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.


It's only you who has decided to interpret what I said the way you did, it was pretty obvious what I meant. This was discussed days ago which i explained everything in more detail which then you complained at Poker for not leaving it and now your still going on about this days later.

You are the one who has misunderstood this wrong and still discussing it days later for some reason.

This debate over the last few days has encompassed way more that the points you made. We've been establishing that Amus isn't necessarily the gospel of car performance, for example.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 4:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14223
Can't we just agree that a 49 page shows that car performance over the year thus far has been roughly equal? We can argue about the minutiae but I think it's pretty clear it would be possible to be leading the WDC at this point in a Ferrari or a Mercedes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 6:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6091
Location: Michigan, USA
mikeyg123 wrote:
Can't we just agree that a 49 page shows that car performance over the year thus far has been roughly equal? We can argue about the minutiae but I think it's pretty clear it would be possible to be leading the WDC at this point in a Ferrari or a Mercedes.

I'd be happy to.

I'd be even happier to agree that it averages out as roughly equal, with Mercedes and Ferrari having each had brief periods of holding a clear advantage, and that the trend now looks set for Mercedes to be the best car for the rest of the season.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 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)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 6:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
mikeyg123 wrote:
Can't we just agree that a 49 page shows that car performance over the year thus far has been roughly equal? We can argue about the minutiae but I think it's pretty clear it would be possible to be leading the WDC at this point in a Ferrari or a Mercedes.

I'd love to agree exactly that


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 6:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2634
Location: England
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Can't we just agree that a 49 page shows that car performance over the year thus far has been roughly equal? We can argue about the minutiae but I think it's pretty clear it would be possible to be leading the WDC at this point in a Ferrari or a Mercedes.

I'd be happy to.

I'd be even happier to agree that it averages out as roughly equal, with Mercedes and Ferrari having each had brief periods of holding a clear advantage, and that the trend now looks set for Mercedes to be the best car for the rest of the season.


Pretty much my opinion right now.

Keep this up and we will the UN on the blower asking us to show them how world peace is done!

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2018: {Rookie Year}
Current positon: 1st | 3 Podiums | 1 Win


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3074
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Can you stop with this rubbish please, you know exactly what I mean when I say Ferrari had the faster car up until Singapore, I have explained it so many times. Everyone else knows what I mean apart from you, are you just making a argument for the sake of if? Do you really think I mean Ferrari had the best car from Aus to Monza? Come on now.

The way you've said it is open to a different interpretation. Why not make it more reflective of what you mean, then? If you'd said Ferrari had edged ahead during the summer but now Mercedes is clawing it back, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.


It's only you who has decided to interpret what I said the way you did, it was pretty obvious what I meant. This was discussed days ago which i explained everything in more detail which then you complained at Poker for not leaving it and now your still going on about this days later.

You are the one who has misunderstood this wrong and still discussing it days later for some reason.

This debate over the last few days has encompassed way more that the points you made. We've been establishing that Amus isn't necessarily the gospel of car performance, for example.


You still brought up something I said which you misunderstood and I thought was settled days ago while at the same time asking Poker to leave it but still bring the same subject up yourself days later. I am just confused by it all.

Anyway you have started going off topic for some reason so it's best to leave it.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I don't care whether Vettel was in the best car. I'm quite happy to acknowledge that Hamilton beat him fair and square, so it's not really relevant.

It's not a question of wanting to give Monza to Mercedes. I'm pointing out that what seems to be taken as a basic fact by some on here is actually up for question even among the experts.

What I see is the advantage yo-yoing between Ferrari and Mercedes depending on track. From France on, Mercedes entered a period where they were quicker, while from Germany to Spa it was Ferrari who looked to have the better car. Yet some people have taken that run to somehow paint a picture that the Ferrari was almost always quicker and it's just not true. And in any event the majority of the time most of the differences were tiny and in some cases it's not all that clear cut anyway. This idea that one car had a clear and consistent advantage across the entire season to date is just wrong

The thing is that nobody has said that, saying the Ferrari was the fastest car doesn't mean it was the fastest car in every race it just means it was faster more often than not, if people had the view that it had a clear and consistent advantage then the word dominant would start to get used, I've not seen one person say that.

well that's not really true, though, is it, because saying it was the fastest car until Singapore gives the one-sided impression that it was fastest throughout the year, and as I have just shown things were pretty even up until Silverstone, after which Ferrari began to pull ahead. It was only really during the summer that they began to show any kind of consistent advantage, and that stopped in Italy. I wouldn't have a problem if people were talking about Ferrari being the fastest car over the summer, but otherwise it's just misleading.

I remember reading an article over the summer where James Allison was saying that the differences between the cars were pretty marginal. Ferrari appeared to have the advantage on the faster corners and the straights, whereas the Mercedes was better in the twisty bits. And even there he stressed that these differences were pretty tiny overall and it was very much track dependent as to who would come out on top. Yet listening to some people on here Hamilton's been fighting an uphill battle throughout the year and that's far removed from the truth. I don't have a problem saying Hamilton aced it when Ferrari did appear to have the upper hand in the summer, but I don't think we need to paint a distorted picture for the rest of the season

No it just means that Ferrari were more often faster, I'm aghast that you don't understand that simple concept and turn it into a global Ferrari was faster every time out.

It was pretty even up until Silverstone but that's not what you were saying when I joined the debate just before Singapore were you was saying it was pretty even up until that point.

As for Italy Ferrari quite easily locked out the front row even with driving errors from Vettel and then threw the race on the opening lap when Vettel, the faster driver spun, which allowed Mercedes to team up on Kimi.

It is small margins that has many times defined which is the faster car, small margins were some people say let's call it even, but then there are people with tools at their disposal that we don't have like GPS data that can actually measure which is the faster car, using science bereft of any kind of bias, also everything I have read give the opinion that Ferrari have had the edge.

As an overview going forward into next year I will continue to believe science more than personal opinion, in particular personal opinion that has shown a level of bias in the past.

I hardly think you are in a position to call anyone else out on bias. You who a short while ago treated two almost identical qualifying scenarios at Singapore differently depending on which driver was involved.

You act as though the science you are so fond of quoting is infallible, but when even the experts don't agree that's clearly not the case. And I've been arguing for months that the cars have been relatively equal, whereas you and others have been desperate to portray the Ferrari as having an advantage. If we can agree now that overall the cars have been well matched this year so far, with minor track-dependent differences, then we actually have a consensus

The Singapore qualifying lap that got rave reviews but for you it was just meh what was so special about it, Kimi's lap last time out at Monza was just as good, and this is your general slant on things, play one thing down, play another thing up.

Which experts don't agree, I see the Ferrari being put forward as the better car more often than Mercedes and you not wanting or not seeing that as being true, this being the case going into Singapore, since then obviously Mercedes have had the upper hand but the damage had already been done to Vettel's title hopes.

_________________
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 Oct 15, 2018 1:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Can you stop with this rubbish please, you know exactly what I mean when I say Ferrari had the faster car up until Singapore, I have explained it so many times. Everyone else knows what I mean apart from you, are you just making a argument for the sake of if? Do you really think I mean Ferrari had the best car from Aus to Monza? Come on now.

The way you've said it is open to a different interpretation. Why not make it more reflective of what you mean, then? If you'd said Ferrari had edged ahead during the summer but now Mercedes is clawing it back, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.


It's only you who has decided to interpret what I said the way you did, it was pretty obvious what I meant. This was discussed days ago which i explained everything in more detail which then you complained at Poker for not leaving it and now your still going on about this days later.

You are the one who has misunderstood this wrong and still discussing it days later for some reason.

This debate over the last few days has encompassed way more that the points you made. We've been establishing that Amus isn't necessarily the gospel of car performance, for example.

Who's been establishing 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: Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Can you stop with this rubbish please, you know exactly what I mean when I say Ferrari had the faster car up until Singapore, I have explained it so many times. Everyone else knows what I mean apart from you, are you just making a argument for the sake of if? Do you really think I mean Ferrari had the best car from Aus to Monza? Come on now.

The way you've said it is open to a different interpretation. Why not make it more reflective of what you mean, then? If you'd said Ferrari had edged ahead during the summer but now Mercedes is clawing it back, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.


It's only you who has decided to interpret what I said the way you did, it was pretty obvious what I meant. This was discussed days ago which i explained everything in more detail which then you complained at Poker for not leaving it and now your still going on about this days later.

You are the one who has misunderstood this wrong and still discussing it days later for some reason.

This debate over the last few days has encompassed way more that the points you made. We've been establishing that Amus isn't necessarily the gospel of car performance, for example.

Who's been establishing that?

Wolff, for one


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
The thing is that nobody has said that, saying the Ferrari was the fastest car doesn't mean it was the fastest car in every race it just means it was faster more often than not, if people had the view that it had a clear and consistent advantage then the word dominant would start to get used, I've not seen one person say that.

well that's not really true, though, is it, because saying it was the fastest car until Singapore gives the one-sided impression that it was fastest throughout the year, and as I have just shown things were pretty even up until Silverstone, after which Ferrari began to pull ahead. It was only really during the summer that they began to show any kind of consistent advantage, and that stopped in Italy. I wouldn't have a problem if people were talking about Ferrari being the fastest car over the summer, but otherwise it's just misleading.

I remember reading an article over the summer where James Allison was saying that the differences between the cars were pretty marginal. Ferrari appeared to have the advantage on the faster corners and the straights, whereas the Mercedes was better in the twisty bits. And even there he stressed that these differences were pretty tiny overall and it was very much track dependent as to who would come out on top. Yet listening to some people on here Hamilton's been fighting an uphill battle throughout the year and that's far removed from the truth. I don't have a problem saying Hamilton aced it when Ferrari did appear to have the upper hand in the summer, but I don't think we need to paint a distorted picture for the rest of the season

No it just means that Ferrari were more often faster, I'm aghast that you don't understand that simple concept and turn it into a global Ferrari was faster every time out.

It was pretty even up until Silverstone but that's not what you were saying when I joined the debate just before Singapore were you was saying it was pretty even up until that point.

As for Italy Ferrari quite easily locked out the front row even with driving errors from Vettel and then threw the race on the opening lap when Vettel, the faster driver spun, which allowed Mercedes to team up on Kimi.

It is small margins that has many times defined which is the faster car, small margins were some people say let's call it even, but then there are people with tools at their disposal that we don't have like GPS data that can actually measure which is the faster car, using science bereft of any kind of bias, also everything I have read give the opinion that Ferrari have had the edge.

As an overview going forward into next year I will continue to believe science more than personal opinion, in particular personal opinion that has shown a level of bias in the past.

I hardly think you are in a position to call anyone else out on bias. You who a short while ago treated two almost identical qualifying scenarios at Singapore differently depending on which driver was involved.

You act as though the science you are so fond of quoting is infallible, but when even the experts don't agree that's clearly not the case. And I've been arguing for months that the cars have been relatively equal, whereas you and others have been desperate to portray the Ferrari as having an advantage. If we can agree now that overall the cars have been well matched this year so far, with minor track-dependent differences, then we actually have a consensus

The Singapore qualifying lap that got rave reviews but for you it was just meh what was so special about it, Kimi's lap last time out at Monza was just as good, and this is your general slant on things, play one thing down, play another thing up.

Which experts don't agree, I see the Ferrari being put forward as the better car more often than Mercedes and you not wanting or not seeing that as being true, this being the case going into Singapore, since then obviously Mercedes have had the upper hand but the damage had already been done to Vettel's title hopes.

I don't know how you can ask that question when we've just been talking about that these last few pages? :?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 7:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Can you stop with this rubbish please, you know exactly what I mean when I say Ferrari had the faster car up until Singapore, I have explained it so many times. Everyone else knows what I mean apart from you, are you just making a argument for the sake of if? Do you really think I mean Ferrari had the best car from Aus to Monza? Come on now.

The way you've said it is open to a different interpretation. Why not make it more reflective of what you mean, then? If you'd said Ferrari had edged ahead during the summer but now Mercedes is clawing it back, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.


It's only you who has decided to interpret what I said the way you did, it was pretty obvious what I meant. This was discussed days ago which i explained everything in more detail which then you complained at Poker for not leaving it and now your still going on about this days later.

You are the one who has misunderstood this wrong and still discussing it days later for some reason.

This debate over the last few days has encompassed way more that the points you made. We've been establishing that Amus isn't necessarily the gospel of car performance, for example.


You still brought up something I said which you misunderstood and I thought was settled days ago while at the same time asking Poker to leave it but still bring the same subject up yourself days later. I am just confused by it all.

Anyway you have started going off topic for some reason so it's best to leave it.

I think there's a certain amount of pot and kettle here, but happy to leave it


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 11:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 731
Flash2k11 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Can't we just agree that a 49 page shows that car performance over the year thus far has been roughly equal? We can argue about the minutiae but I think it's pretty clear it would be possible to be leading the WDC at this point in a Ferrari or a Mercedes.

I'd be happy to.

I'd be even happier to agree that it averages out as roughly equal, with Mercedes and Ferrari having each had brief periods of holding a clear advantage, and that the trend now looks set for Mercedes to be the best car for the rest of the season.


Pretty much my opinion right now.

Keep this up and we will the UN on the blower asking us to show them how world peace is done!


Yes the Mercedes looks kind of unstoppable but then so did the Ferrari for a short stage. Heading into Monza Ferrari looked unstoppable, it was only the freak rain showers in Q3 at Spa and Hungary and during the race in Germany that had kept Mercedes in it over the previous races.

I thought Mercedes had little chance at the title at that stage as there car was also a lot more unreliable and slower and they couldn't keep relying on rain and Singapore was approaching in which Mercedes I expected to be fighting for 4th/5th. Amazing how unpredictable this season has been. It would not surprise me if Vettel dominated USA though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
The way you've said it is open to a different interpretation. Why not make it more reflective of what you mean, then? If you'd said Ferrari had edged ahead during the summer but now Mercedes is clawing it back, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.


It's only you who has decided to interpret what I said the way you did, it was pretty obvious what I meant. This was discussed days ago which i explained everything in more detail which then you complained at Poker for not leaving it and now your still going on about this days later.

You are the one who has misunderstood this wrong and still discussing it days later for some reason.

This debate over the last few days has encompassed way more that the points you made. We've been establishing that Amus isn't necessarily the gospel of car performance, for example.

Who's been establishing that?

Wolff, for one

Wolff at other times you might consider him to be biased and not to be believed and now you put him forward as a technical expert, your words I believe?

_________________
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 Oct 15, 2018 12:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
well that's not really true, though, is it, because saying it was the fastest car until Singapore gives the one-sided impression that it was fastest throughout the year, and as I have just shown things were pretty even up until Silverstone, after which Ferrari began to pull ahead. It was only really during the summer that they began to show any kind of consistent advantage, and that stopped in Italy. I wouldn't have a problem if people were talking about Ferrari being the fastest car over the summer, but otherwise it's just misleading.

I remember reading an article over the summer where James Allison was saying that the differences between the cars were pretty marginal. Ferrari appeared to have the advantage on the faster corners and the straights, whereas the Mercedes was better in the twisty bits. And even there he stressed that these differences were pretty tiny overall and it was very much track dependent as to who would come out on top. Yet listening to some people on here Hamilton's been fighting an uphill battle throughout the year and that's far removed from the truth. I don't have a problem saying Hamilton aced it when Ferrari did appear to have the upper hand in the summer, but I don't think we need to paint a distorted picture for the rest of the season

No it just means that Ferrari were more often faster, I'm aghast that you don't understand that simple concept and turn it into a global Ferrari was faster every time out.

It was pretty even up until Silverstone but that's not what you were saying when I joined the debate just before Singapore were you was saying it was pretty even up until that point.

As for Italy Ferrari quite easily locked out the front row even with driving errors from Vettel and then threw the race on the opening lap when Vettel, the faster driver spun, which allowed Mercedes to team up on Kimi.

It is small margins that has many times defined which is the faster car, small margins were some people say let's call it even, but then there are people with tools at their disposal that we don't have like GPS data that can actually measure which is the faster car, using science bereft of any kind of bias, also everything I have read give the opinion that Ferrari have had the edge.

As an overview going forward into next year I will continue to believe science more than personal opinion, in particular personal opinion that has shown a level of bias in the past.

I hardly think you are in a position to call anyone else out on bias. You who a short while ago treated two almost identical qualifying scenarios at Singapore differently depending on which driver was involved.

You act as though the science you are so fond of quoting is infallible, but when even the experts don't agree that's clearly not the case. And I've been arguing for months that the cars have been relatively equal, whereas you and others have been desperate to portray the Ferrari as having an advantage. If we can agree now that overall the cars have been well matched this year so far, with minor track-dependent differences, then we actually have a consensus

The Singapore qualifying lap that got rave reviews but for you it was just meh what was so special about it, Kimi's lap last time out at Monza was just as good, and this is your general slant on things, play one thing down, play another thing up.

Which experts don't agree, I see the Ferrari being put forward as the better car more often than Mercedes and you not wanting or not seeing that as being true, this being the case going into Singapore, since then obviously Mercedes have had the upper hand but the damage had already been done to Vettel's title hopes.

I don't know how you can ask that question when we've just been talking about that these last few pages? :?

Wolff is a technical expert now?

_________________
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 Oct 15, 2018 12:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Johnson wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Can't we just agree that a 49 page shows that car performance over the year thus far has been roughly equal? We can argue about the minutiae but I think it's pretty clear it would be possible to be leading the WDC at this point in a Ferrari or a Mercedes.

I'd be happy to.

I'd be even happier to agree that it averages out as roughly equal, with Mercedes and Ferrari having each had brief periods of holding a clear advantage, and that the trend now looks set for Mercedes to be the best car for the rest of the season.


Pretty much my opinion right now.

Keep this up and we will the UN on the blower asking us to show them how world peace is done!


Yes the Mercedes looks kind of unstoppable but then so did the Ferrari for a short stage. Heading into Monza Ferrari looked unstoppable, it was only the freak rain showers in Q3 at Spa and Hungary and during the race in Germany that had kept Mercedes in it over the previous races.

I thought Mercedes had little chance at the title at that stage as there car was also a lot more unreliable and slower and they couldn't keep relying on rain and Singapore was approaching in which Mercedes I expected to be fighting for 4th/5th. Amazing how unpredictable this season has been. It would not surprise me if Vettel dominated USA though.

That was exactly my outlook as well which I posted in this thread and Hamilton's points lead looked tenuous given that the Ferrari looked faster in the previous 4 races going into Singapore.

_________________
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 Oct 15, 2018 12:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
It's only you who has decided to interpret what I said the way you did, it was pretty obvious what I meant. This was discussed days ago which i explained everything in more detail which then you complained at Poker for not leaving it and now your still going on about this days later.

You are the one who has misunderstood this wrong and still discussing it days later for some reason.

This debate over the last few days has encompassed way more that the points you made. We've been establishing that Amus isn't necessarily the gospel of car performance, for example.

Who's been establishing that?

Wolff, for one

Wolff at other times you might consider him to be biased and not to be believed and now you put him forward as a technical expert, your words I believe?

you're questioning him now?

You're right, I do question Wolff's motivation in saying some of things he says, like when he campaigned against changing the rules and tried to claim that it was in the best interests of F1 and the smaller teams in particular for things to stay as they were, which coincidentally meant that Mercedes' position at the front would likely have remained unassailable but which he claimed hadn't influenced his position on the matter. I am usually rather skeptical of many of the public statements made by drivers or team principals, since they usually do have some element of bias to them. However in this instance I'm struggling to see what he would have to gain by saying that the Mercedes was faster in Silverstone.

However, whether I believe him or not is not really the point, which is clearly that he would be someone who has a significantly higher level of knowledge of the situation than anyone on this forum, so yes, he would probably qualify as expert opinion relative to everyone on here. That doesn't make him right, as I stressed when initially discussing his position on the matter, but it does illustrate that even among the experts the view is not unanimous. So you using Amus to try to shut down discussion on the matter isn't the show-stopper you think it is.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
No it just means that Ferrari were more often faster, I'm aghast that you don't understand that simple concept and turn it into a global Ferrari was faster every time out.

It was pretty even up until Silverstone but that's not what you were saying when I joined the debate just before Singapore were you was saying it was pretty even up until that point.

As for Italy Ferrari quite easily locked out the front row even with driving errors from Vettel and then threw the race on the opening lap when Vettel, the faster driver spun, which allowed Mercedes to team up on Kimi.

It is small margins that has many times defined which is the faster car, small margins were some people say let's call it even, but then there are people with tools at their disposal that we don't have like GPS data that can actually measure which is the faster car, using science bereft of any kind of bias, also everything I have read give the opinion that Ferrari have had the edge.

As an overview going forward into next year I will continue to believe science more than personal opinion, in particular personal opinion that has shown a level of bias in the past.

I hardly think you are in a position to call anyone else out on bias. You who a short while ago treated two almost identical qualifying scenarios at Singapore differently depending on which driver was involved.

You act as though the science you are so fond of quoting is infallible, but when even the experts don't agree that's clearly not the case. And I've been arguing for months that the cars have been relatively equal, whereas you and others have been desperate to portray the Ferrari as having an advantage. If we can agree now that overall the cars have been well matched this year so far, with minor track-dependent differences, then we actually have a consensus

The Singapore qualifying lap that got rave reviews but for you it was just meh what was so special about it, Kimi's lap last time out at Monza was just as good, and this is your general slant on things, play one thing down, play another thing up.

Which experts don't agree, I see the Ferrari being put forward as the better car more often than Mercedes and you not wanting or not seeing that as being true, this being the case going into Singapore, since then obviously Mercedes have had the upper hand but the damage had already been done to Vettel's title hopes.

I don't know how you can ask that question when we've just been talking about that these last few pages? :?

Wolff is a technical expert now?

You think he gets no technical advice and isn't more informed on the matter than the average viewer?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 986
pokerman wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Can't we just agree that a 49 page shows that car performance over the year thus far has been roughly equal? We can argue about the minutiae but I think it's pretty clear it would be possible to be leading the WDC at this point in a Ferrari or a Mercedes.

I'd be happy to.

I'd be even happier to agree that it averages out as roughly equal, with Mercedes and Ferrari having each had brief periods of holding a clear advantage, and that the trend now looks set for Mercedes to be the best car for the rest of the season.


Pretty much my opinion right now.

Keep this up and we will the UN on the blower asking us to show them how world peace is done!


Yes the Mercedes looks kind of unstoppable but then so did the Ferrari for a short stage. Heading into Monza Ferrari looked unstoppable, it was only the freak rain showers in Q3 at Spa and Hungary and during the race in Germany that had kept Mercedes in it over the previous races.

I thought Mercedes had little chance at the title at that stage as there car was also a lot more unreliable and slower and they couldn't keep relying on rain and Singapore was approaching in which Mercedes I expected to be fighting for 4th/5th. Amazing how unpredictable this season has been. It would not surprise me if Vettel dominated USA though.

That was exactly my outlook as well which I posted in this thread and Hamilton's points lead looked tenuous given that the Ferrari looked faster in the previous 4 races going into Singapore.


How on earth can you judge those races 4-0 Ferrari?
Isn't the weather part off it or should we twist the conditions to better suit Ferrari?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:58 pm
Posts: 1358
Location: London
AnRs wrote:
How on earth can you judge those races 4-0 Ferrari?
Isn't the weather part off it or should we twist the conditions to better suit Ferrari?


https://www.racefans.net/2018/10/15/ferrari-not-showing-their-real-pace-ricciardo/

Gary Anderson (Autosport)

Yes, Mercedes has made its car better: it has reduced the blistering problems we saw in Belgium and it's stronger off the slow corners. But in the past three races - in Singapore, Russia and Japan - Mercedes has been way ahead on pace. Ferrari is now 0.6% behind, having dominated the preceding three races (Hungary, Belgium and Italy) on pace and been about 0.1% ahead. So that's a 0.7% swing.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/feature/8556/has-ferrari-faltered-or-mercedes-thrived


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3074
Lojik wrote:
AnRs wrote:
How on earth can you judge those races 4-0 Ferrari?
Isn't the weather part off it or should we twist the conditions to better suit Ferrari?


https://www.racefans.net/2018/10/15/ferrari-not-showing-their-real-pace-ricciardo/

Gary Anderson (Autosport)

Yes, Mercedes has made its car better: it has reduced the blistering problems we saw in Belgium and it's stronger off the slow corners. But in the past three races - in Singapore, Russia and Japan - Mercedes has been way ahead on pace. Ferrari is now 0.6% behind, having dominated the preceding three races (Hungary, Belgium and Italy) on pace and been about 0.1% ahead. So that's a 0.7% swing.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/feature/8556/has-ferrari-faltered-or-mercedes-thrived


https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... te-floppt/

"There was a phase when most would have bet their money on Sebastian Vettel and Ferrari as world champion. That was pretty much exactly between the Grand Prix of Austria and the GP Italy . In these six races , Ferrari had an average of 2 tenths ahead. And just when it was believed that Singapore, Sochi and Suzuka had particularly strong tracks for Ferrari on the program, the Mercedes fired the turbo and drove their red pursuers by 3 to 5 tenths per lap of it."

"Ferrari's problem is now the ride over a lap. From plus two-tenths to minus five, that's a 0.7 seconds turnaround. No team in the world gets so much faster from one race to another. The other way around, it's more like a shoe. Ferrari just got worse. And noticed that way too late."

Like I said yesterday Amus reporting Ferrari have lost time to Red bull while the gap between Mercedes to Red bull has stayed the same. Also Ferrari have lost time to their customer teams. Mercedes updates was worth less than 2 tenths.

"If we compare the last three races on completely different tracks, then you will notice a lot in common. The engine advantage of Ferrari has disappeared. The red missiles no longer gain 3 to 4 tenths of the straight on their championship rivals as before. They also do not spend so much time on the straights on their customer teams. What still separates factory and customer is the better air resistance of the Ferrari SF71H."

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 986
Lojik wrote:
AnRs wrote:
How on earth can you judge those races 4-0 Ferrari?
Isn't the weather part off it or should we twist the conditions to better suit Ferrari?


https://www.racefans.net/2018/10/15/ferrari-not-showing-their-real-pace-ricciardo/

Gary Anderson (Autosport)

Yes, Mercedes has made its car better: it has reduced the blistering problems we saw in Belgium and it's stronger off the slow corners. But in the past three races - in Singapore, Russia and Japan - Mercedes has been way ahead on pace. Ferrari is now 0.6% behind, having dominated the preceding three races (Hungary, Belgium and Italy) on pace and been about 0.1% ahead. So that's a 0.7% swing.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/feature/8556/has-ferrari-faltered-or-mercedes-thrived


Dominated with a 0.1 % I've seen Gary Andersson slaughetered in here for a lot less than that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:58 pm
Posts: 1358
Location: London
AnRs wrote:
Dominated with a 0.1 % I've seen Gary Andersson slaughetered in here for a lot less than that.


You are free to take issue with the wording, but that doesn't disprove or contradict the conclusion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 986
Lojik wrote:
AnRs wrote:
Dominated with a 0.1 % I've seen Gary Andersson slaughetered in here for a lot less than that.


You are free to take issue with the wording, but that doesn't disprove or contradict the conclusion.


IMO it does, it makes his claim a bit laughable. What is challengable is how anyone can firmly suppose they can judge the performance from those races that soundly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Lojik wrote:
AnRs wrote:
Dominated with a 0.1 % I've seen Gary Andersson slaughetered in here for a lot less than that.


You are free to take issue with the wording, but that doesn't disprove or contradict the conclusion.

yeah, except for the fact that the Ferrari's didn't dominate in Monza. It's like these guys just look at qualifying and make their write-ups from that. During the race there was nothing to suggest that the Ferraris were at all quicker than the Mercs, let alone that they dominated


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:58 pm
Posts: 1358
Location: London
Zoue wrote:
Lojik wrote:
AnRs wrote:
Dominated with a 0.1 % I've seen Gary Andersson slaughetered in here for a lot less than that.


You are free to take issue with the wording, but that doesn't disprove or contradict the conclusion.

yeah, except for the fact that the Ferrari's didn't dominate in Monza. It's like these guys just look at qualifying and make their write-ups from that. During the race there was nothing to suggest that the Ferraris were at all quicker than the Mercs, let alone that they dominated


You know what I am done with this thread. All reason is lost and it's now just a battle of the agenda monkeys. We have Zoue clinging to a single quote from Wolff like a late night drunk clinging to a kebab, and we have AnRs who basically says "NU UH" to any data or quotes provided that don't correlate with his own fantasy world where Merc are "dominant". There is no discussion left to be had, the lines are drawn and no amount of reasonable debate will change a single thing. This thread is dead!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 986
Lojik wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Lojik wrote:
AnRs wrote:
Dominated with a 0.1 % I've seen Gary Andersson slaughetered in here for a lot less than that.


You are free to take issue with the wording, but that doesn't disprove or contradict the conclusion.

yeah, except for the fact that the Ferrari's didn't dominate in Monza. It's like these guys just look at qualifying and make their write-ups from that. During the race there was nothing to suggest that the Ferraris were at all quicker than the Mercs, let alone that they dominated


You know what I am done with this thread. All reason is lost and it's now just a battle of the agenda monkeys. We have Zoue clinging to a single quote from Wolff like a late night drunk clinging to a kebab, and we have AnRs who basically says "NU UH" to any data or quotes provided that don't correlate with his own fantasy world where Merc are "dominant". There is no discussion left to be had, the lines are drawn and no amount of reasonable debate will change a single thing. This thread is dead!


That's one way to leave a discussion, single out those who disagrees and try to come out as unbiased : )
But you got it right at the end, Merc is dominant right now, the question is will they stay that way now that the season is won?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Lojik wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Lojik wrote:
AnRs wrote:
Dominated with a 0.1 % I've seen Gary Andersson slaughetered in here for a lot less than that.


You are free to take issue with the wording, but that doesn't disprove or contradict the conclusion.

yeah, except for the fact that the Ferrari's didn't dominate in Monza. It's like these guys just look at qualifying and make their write-ups from that. During the race there was nothing to suggest that the Ferraris were at all quicker than the Mercs, let alone that they dominated


You know what I am done with this thread. All reason is lost and it's now just a battle of the agenda monkeys. We have Zoue clinging to a single quote from Wolff like a late night drunk clinging to a kebab, and we have AnRs who basically says "NU UH" to any data or quotes provided that don't correlate with his own fantasy world where Merc are "dominant". There is no discussion left to be had, the lines are drawn and no amount of reasonable debate will change a single thing. This thread is dead!

Don't think there's any need for that, really. We've managed fine up to now without getting personal. Poor form


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
This debate over the last few days has encompassed way more that the points you made. We've been establishing that Amus isn't necessarily the gospel of car performance, for example.

Who's been establishing that?

Wolff, for one

Wolff at other times you might consider him to be biased and not to be believed and now you put him forward as a technical expert, your words I believe?

you're questioning him now?

You're right, I do question Wolff's motivation in saying some of things he says, like when he campaigned against changing the rules and tried to claim that it was in the best interests of F1 and the smaller teams in particular for things to stay as they were, which coincidentally meant that Mercedes' position at the front would likely have remained unassailable but which he claimed hadn't influenced his position on the matter. I am usually rather skeptical of many of the public statements made by drivers or team principals, since they usually do have some element of bias to them. However in this instance I'm struggling to see what he would have to gain by saying that the Mercedes was faster in Silverstone.

However, whether I believe him or not is not really the point, which is clearly that he would be someone who has a significantly higher level of knowledge of the situation than anyone on this forum, so yes, he would probably qualify as expert opinion relative to everyone on here. That doesn't make him right, as I stressed when initially discussing his position on the matter, but it does illustrate that even among the experts the view is not unanimous. So you using Amus to try to shut down discussion on the matter isn't the show-stopper you think it is.

During this period how often did we hear Hamilton say the Ferrari was faster and Mercedes need to improve, this covers the time period when I said that Ferrari were quicker.

https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433 ... n-mercedes

It's a typical tactic to find one race that can be questioned to then roll over all the other races were Ferrari were faster, I'm guessing you would'nt be agreeing with Hamilton because unlike Wolff he's not a technical expert?

_________________
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 Oct 15, 2018 4:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I hardly think you are in a position to call anyone else out on bias. You who a short while ago treated two almost identical qualifying scenarios at Singapore differently depending on which driver was involved.

You act as though the science you are so fond of quoting is infallible, but when even the experts don't agree that's clearly not the case. And I've been arguing for months that the cars have been relatively equal, whereas you and others have been desperate to portray the Ferrari as having an advantage. If we can agree now that overall the cars have been well matched this year so far, with minor track-dependent differences, then we actually have a consensus

The Singapore qualifying lap that got rave reviews but for you it was just meh what was so special about it, Kimi's lap last time out at Monza was just as good, and this is your general slant on things, play one thing down, play another thing up.

Which experts don't agree, I see the Ferrari being put forward as the better car more often than Mercedes and you not wanting or not seeing that as being true, this being the case going into Singapore, since then obviously Mercedes have had the upper hand but the damage had already been done to Vettel's title hopes.

I don't know how you can ask that question when we've just been talking about that these last few pages? :?

Wolff is a technical expert now?

You think he gets no technical advice and isn't more informed on the matter than the average viewer?

There's plenty of people that have more technical knowledge than us but that never stopped you from saying they are wrong.

_________________
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: Blake, TheGiantHogweed 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