planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Aug 15, 2018 9:25 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 1:36 pm 
I am bored of this forum, time to call time over on it. The ship began sinking many years ago and most of the best contributors are long gone. Time to join them. Thank you for the 17+ years. It was fun. Please can a mod delete/suspend my account.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 2:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5020
lamo wrote:
I am bored of this forum, time to call time over on it. The ship began sinking many years ago and most of the best contributors are long gone. Time to join them. Thank you for the 17+ years. It was fun. Please can a mod delete/suspend my account.

Hey man, for what it's worth, I always respected you and your contributions. Been thinking of doing the same for a few years myself. Best of luck to you and yours.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 2:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6255
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo wrote:
I am bored of this forum, time to call time over on it. The ship began sinking many years ago and most of the best contributors are long gone. Time to join them. Thank you for the 17+ years. It was fun. Please can a mod delete/suspend my account.

Hey man, for what it's worth, I always respected you and your contributions. Been thinking of doing the same for a few years myself. Best of luck to you and yours.

Everyone has thought of this at times. Without the tearful note...

Oh well, good luck


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 2:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5020
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo wrote:
I am bored of this forum, time to call time over on it. The ship began sinking many years ago and most of the best contributors are long gone. Time to join them. Thank you for the 17+ years. It was fun. Please can a mod delete/suspend my account.

Hey man, for what it's worth, I always respected you and your contributions. Been thinking of doing the same for a few years myself. Best of luck to you and yours.

Everyone has thought of this at times. Without the tearful note...

Oh well, good luck

Honestly, I don't know you but I would point out that this type of post is a big part of the problem in here. It's disrespectful and it is unnecessary. There are plenty of arguments in here already without people going out of their way to agitate one another.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 2:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6255
sandman1347 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo wrote:
I am bored of this forum, time to call time over on it. The ship began sinking many years ago and most of the best contributors are long gone. Time to join them. Thank you for the 17+ years. It was fun. Please can a mod delete/suspend my account.

Hey man, for what it's worth, I always respected you and your contributions. Been thinking of doing the same for a few years myself. Best of luck to you and yours.

Everyone has thought of this at times. Without the tearful note...

Oh well, good luck

Honestly, I don't know you but I would point out that this type of post is a big part of the problem in here. It's disrespectful and it is unnecessary. There are plenty of arguments in here already without people going out of their way to agitate one another.

Why do you think that it is disrespectful? I think the opposite is true; others have left without the teary goodbye that insults the current posters. If you want to leave, then just do so without provoking comments about the quality of the current posters.

I respect every poster in here sandman1347, even the ones that I don't agree with. I'll comment on their posts and that's about it. lamo felt like leaving after a heated argument with another poster, fair enough. But please, don't insult everyone else in here in order to provoke an answer. Good luck and good bye to him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 117
lamo wrote:
I am bored of this forum, time to call time over on it. The ship began sinking many years ago and most of the best contributors are long gone. Time to join them. Thank you for the 17+ years. It was fun. Please can a mod delete/suspend my account.

I've never understood why people want their account suspended or deleted.

Just in case they can't resist the temptation of coming back?

Meh.

I'm new here(long time lurker), and you all seem very insightful and great to talk to.

Cheers!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 13740
lamo wrote:
I am bored of this forum, time to call time over on it. The ship began sinking many years ago and most of the best contributors are long gone. Time to join them. Thank you for the 17+ years. It was fun. Please can a mod delete/suspend my account.


I hope you change your mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 11:41 am
Posts: 185
lamo wrote:
I am bored of this forum, time to call time over on it. The ship began sinking many years ago and most of the best contributors are long gone. Time to join them. Thank you for the 17+ years. It was fun. Please can a mod delete/suspend my account.


Your posts are relatively balanced. Your contributions insightful. I hope you change your mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4715
Yeah absolutely, just have a cool off period bud, Baku's not until a week Friday so have a break and don't do anything hasty.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4715
If Renault's upgrade delivers this could really be one of the great seasons. It's set up perfectly with Max and Lewis not winning yet and assuming they do, then it could be really tight between at least 4 drivers going into the summer with a shot and even Kimi and Bottas are driving well right now.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3308
lamo wrote:
I am bored of this forum, time to call time over on it. The ship began sinking many years ago and most of the best contributors are long gone. Time to join them. Thank you for the 17+ years. It was fun. Please can a mod delete/suspend my account.


Like others have said I hope you reconsider. Your posts are always interesting to read.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 9:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:21 am
Posts: 3426
I'd suggest we get back on topic guys, as far as I'm concerned the issue is resolved, sadly.

_________________
AlienTurnedHuman wrote:
Eurytus probably thought he was God. At least until he was banned. Which means if he was God, it makes me very scared of PF1-Mod.

Please report forum problems to us, via PM/Feedback Thread. Screenshots will also help.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26847
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
didn't he say this:

Bottas: “Sebastian was on the same tyre, there was no big pace difference between the cars, so in theory it would have been manageable until the end.”



"no big pace difference" does not equal "no pace pace advantage"

Splitting hairs, really. Basically meant that there wasn't a lot in it


That is not splitting hairs at all. They are completely different statements and trying to pass one off as the other is twisty things, AnR.

One means, Ferrari was definitely no quicker "no pace advantage" than Mercedes.

One means, Ferrari was possibly quicker or slower but not by a significant enough amount to threaten his win. The overtake delta in China was 1.0-1.2 seconds so he is definitely right.

It is very much splitting hairs, because we are not writing legal documents. No big pace difference means that he wasn't worried about Vettel having any advantage over him, which is exactly the gist being conveyed.

I've not been reading this thread until now when it caught my attention and disappointment to see lamo out of frustration it seems has decided to leave the site.

No big pace advantage clearly means Vettel didn't have the pace to overcome the 1 second overtaking delta which gets changed to the cars were close to equal in performance, always the same narrative it seems?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23178
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:

"no big pace difference" does not equal "no pace pace advantage"

Splitting hairs, really. Basically meant that there wasn't a lot in it


That is not splitting hairs at all. They are completely different statements and trying to pass one off as the other is twisty things, AnR.

One means, Ferrari was definitely no quicker "no pace advantage" than Mercedes.

One means, Ferrari was possibly quicker or slower but not by a significant enough amount to threaten his win. The overtake delta in China was 1.0-1.2 seconds so he is definitely right.

It is very much splitting hairs, because we are not writing legal documents. No big pace difference means that he wasn't worried about Vettel having any advantage over him, which is exactly the gist being conveyed.

I've not been reading this thread until now when it caught my attention and disappointment to see lamo out of frustration it seems has decided to leave the site.

No big pace advantage clearly means Vettel didn't have the pace to overcome the 1 second overtaking delta which gets changed to the cars were close to equal in performance, always the same narrative it seems?

No need to throw in accusations of narrative. Is there any evidence the cars weren't close in performance? I'd suggest no big pace advantage does indicate the cars were close

In the race, I mean, in case that's not blindingly obvious


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 6:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9238
lamo wrote:
Covalent wrote:
lamo wrote:
kleefton wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
I shouldn't be against you, but this is the most dodgy looking place to find out this. Somebody I've never heard of posting a tweet means Bottas has broken the record. Why on earth wouldn't they mention a pit stop record at the time? Really tricky to believe this especially as this doesn't look official in any way. What other proof is there at this moment in time? I'm not saying it won't turn out to be true, but it seems crazy for this to be the only place I have seen say this. Sometimes the teams way of measuring the stop is very different to the official speed record for a stop. If it was officially broken, I am certain it will have been news all over the place on the same day. It was a very quick stop, but I am at the moment incredibly doubtful that it beat William's official record from a few years ago. That was very soon noted as the record.


You are right. The official Bottas pit stop was 2.15 sec.

https://www.formula1.com/en/championshi ... -2018.html


Mercedes record the time as the "green light time" that was 1.83 they broke there own record. The stationary time was 2.15, which I believe was also a Mercedes record. The difference between the two is Bottas' reaction time to get the car moving once the green light came up.

Sorry to confuse, but I did say "Mercedes performed there quickest ever pit stop" not the quickest pit stop of all time, i.e. beating Williams.

The "green light time" (if that's even a thing, not seen a single reference to it beside here) would be something completely irrelevant to making the undercut work though. They could do it in one nanosecond but if the driver doesn't move until after two seconds it won't help them one bit. Even the stationary time wasn't a new record as they've at least recorded the same time twice before.


Mercedes have always measured there quickest stop like that. The green like time is the performance of the crew. The total stationary time is the performance of the crew + driver reaction to get away.

When Mercedes and all teams practise pit stops they measure the green light time, because when they are practising (and they practise hundreds upon hundreds of times per season) the car does not pull away and remains stationary so they couldn't measure total stationary time even if they wanted to.

The total stationary was still the joint quickest pit stop of the year and at least 0.6 quicker than Vettels and 0.4 quicker than Hamiltons, Vettels total stationary isn't in the top 10 so I am not sure by how much quicker. I brought this information to give insight to how quick Bottas' out lap was and how he was able to undercut from 3.2 seconds back. I don't think anything you said changes that?

I appreciate you are cynical of the term "green light time" but Mercedes have been using the phrase green light time for about 4 or 5 seasons, like on there official twitter describing this very stop. https://twitter.com/MercedesAMGF1/statu ... 9888663553

To me it is very interesting information and in part explains why Ferrari expected to safe pitting 1 lap after Bottas but a few things happened that resulted in Bottas doing it and the 0.6+ quicker stop was a significant part of that, coupled with great in and out laps and a poor in lap from Vettel.

Fair enough, had not heard of it before. My point was that it was the stationary time (which in itself was quite low) that was instrumental in the undercut, but of course it wouldn't have been possible without the super low green light time. :thumbup:

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 7:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
Posts: 643
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 8:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9238
I think they're close enough to have the drivers make the difference which is what most of us want anyway right?

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 8:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6255
Laz_T800 wrote:
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.

Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2772
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.

Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


I'm pretty sure Vettel was holding back in the first stint, I have heard Wolff say Vettel was holding back which would go with reports I have read saying Ferrari was fuel saving and losing behind 0.1 - 0.3 a lap to Bottas in sector 3 because of this. I have also read Vettel was just driving to delta and Ferrari miscalculated the gap just like Mercedes in Aus. IMO Vettel had more time in his pocket but then of course Bottas might have had about more time.

Ferrari was faster in race pace at China, don't think that can be disputed, how big the gap was would be quite interesting, problem is whether it's 0.2, 0.5 or a second you still won't be able to overtake the car in front. Bottas said it's not a big advantage and that's pretty obvious but to see Vettel have DRS for consecutive laps and keep within 1.7 seconds makes me wonder what the gap was.

_________________
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: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23178
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.

Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


I'm pretty sure Vettel was holding back in the first stint, I have heard Wolff say Vettel was holding back which would go with reports I have read saying Ferrari was fuel saving and losing behind 0.1 - 0.3 a lap to Bottas in sector 3 because of this. I have also read Vettel was just driving to delta and Ferrari miscalculated the gap just like Mercedes in Aus. IMO Vettel had more time in his pocket but then of course Bottas might have had about more time.

Ferrari was faster in race pace at China, don't think that can be disputed, how big the gap was would be quite interesting, problem is whether it's 0.2, 0.5 or a second you still won't be able to overtake the car in front. Bottas said it's not a big advantage and that's pretty obvious but to see Vettel have DRS for consecutive laps and keep within 1.7 seconds makes me wonder what the gap was.

Ferrari looked faster in the first stint, but it doesn't look there was a lot in it and it was only in Vettel's hands - Kimi couldn't keep up. I'm not sure it's that clear cut after the first stop


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26847
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Splitting hairs, really. Basically meant that there wasn't a lot in it


That is not splitting hairs at all. They are completely different statements and trying to pass one off as the other is twisty things, AnR.

One means, Ferrari was definitely no quicker "no pace advantage" than Mercedes.

One means, Ferrari was possibly quicker or slower but not by a significant enough amount to threaten his win. The overtake delta in China was 1.0-1.2 seconds so he is definitely right.

It is very much splitting hairs, because we are not writing legal documents. No big pace difference means that he wasn't worried about Vettel having any advantage over him, which is exactly the gist being conveyed.

I've not been reading this thread until now when it caught my attention and disappointment to see lamo out of frustration it seems has decided to leave the site.

No big pace advantage clearly means Vettel didn't have the pace to overcome the 1 second overtaking delta which gets changed to the cars were close to equal in performance, always the same narrative it seems?

No need to throw in accusations of narrative. Is there any evidence the cars weren't close in performance? I'd suggest no big pace advantage does indicate the cars were close

In the race, I mean, in case that's not blindingly obvious

I'm referring to Bottas being misquoted which Anrs kindly apologised for.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26847
Covalent wrote:
lamo wrote:
Covalent wrote:
lamo wrote:
kleefton wrote:
You are right. The official Bottas pit stop was 2.15 sec.

https://www.formula1.com/en/championshi ... -2018.html


Mercedes record the time as the "green light time" that was 1.83 they broke there own record. The stationary time was 2.15, which I believe was also a Mercedes record. The difference between the two is Bottas' reaction time to get the car moving once the green light came up.

Sorry to confuse, but I did say "Mercedes performed there quickest ever pit stop" not the quickest pit stop of all time, i.e. beating Williams.

The "green light time" (if that's even a thing, not seen a single reference to it beside here) would be something completely irrelevant to making the undercut work though. They could do it in one nanosecond but if the driver doesn't move until after two seconds it won't help them one bit. Even the stationary time wasn't a new record as they've at least recorded the same time twice before.


Mercedes have always measured there quickest stop like that. The green like time is the performance of the crew. The total stationary time is the performance of the crew + driver reaction to get away.

When Mercedes and all teams practise pit stops they measure the green light time, because when they are practising (and they practise hundreds upon hundreds of times per season) the car does not pull away and remains stationary so they couldn't measure total stationary time even if they wanted to.

The total stationary was still the joint quickest pit stop of the year and at least 0.6 quicker than Vettels and 0.4 quicker than Hamiltons, Vettels total stationary isn't in the top 10 so I am not sure by how much quicker. I brought this information to give insight to how quick Bottas' out lap was and how he was able to undercut from 3.2 seconds back. I don't think anything you said changes that?

I appreciate you are cynical of the term "green light time" but Mercedes have been using the phrase green light time for about 4 or 5 seasons, like on there official twitter describing this very stop. https://twitter.com/MercedesAMGF1/statu ... 9888663553

To me it is very interesting information and in part explains why Ferrari expected to safe pitting 1 lap after Bottas but a few things happened that resulted in Bottas doing it and the 0.6+ quicker stop was a significant part of that, coupled with great in and out laps and a poor in lap from Vettel.

Fair enough, had not heard of it before. My point was that it was the stationary time (which in itself was quite low) that was instrumental in the undercut, but of course it wouldn't have been possible without the super low green light time. :thumbup:

You're replying to someone who is no longer on the site.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26847
Covalent wrote:
I think they're close enough to have the drivers make the difference which is what most of us want anyway right?

Like last year?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
Posts: 643
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.

Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


Regarding the BIB. One also might say that Kimi has been right up there with Seb so far this season.
Seb has been head and shoulders above Kim in recent years so are we to assume that an on form Seb would take the Ferrari even further ahead.
I find it difficult to understand why people try and manufacture a reason for the the obvious answer not to be the right one.
Sometimes a driver that is usually the slower will just hook everything up and get the best out of the package.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26847
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.

Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.

From what I could see he was being pulled apart left, right and centre, unfortunately he wasn't able to see things for what they were or maybe he did and just thought what's the point?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26847
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.

Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


I'm pretty sure Vettel was holding back in the first stint, I have heard Wolff say Vettel was holding back which would go with reports I have read saying Ferrari was fuel saving and losing behind 0.1 - 0.3 a lap to Bottas in sector 3 because of this. I have also read Vettel was just driving to delta and Ferrari miscalculated the gap just like Mercedes in Aus. IMO Vettel had more time in his pocket but then of course Bottas might have had about more time.

Ferrari was faster in race pace at China, don't think that can be disputed, how big the gap was would be quite interesting, problem is whether it's 0.2, 0.5 or a second you still won't be able to overtake the car in front. Bottas said it's not a big advantage and that's pretty obvious but to see Vettel have DRS for consecutive laps and keep within 1.7 seconds makes me wonder what the gap was.

Ferrari looked faster in the first stint, but it doesn't look there was a lot in it and it was only in Vettel's hands - Kimi couldn't keep up. I'm not sure it's that clear cut after the first stop

Kimi was stuck behind Verstappen realising he had no chance to pass, I don't understand how you are able to judge a driver's pace like that?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23178
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.

Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


I'm pretty sure Vettel was holding back in the first stint, I have heard Wolff say Vettel was holding back which would go with reports I have read saying Ferrari was fuel saving and losing behind 0.1 - 0.3 a lap to Bottas in sector 3 because of this. I have also read Vettel was just driving to delta and Ferrari miscalculated the gap just like Mercedes in Aus. IMO Vettel had more time in his pocket but then of course Bottas might have had about more time.

Ferrari was faster in race pace at China, don't think that can be disputed, how big the gap was would be quite interesting, problem is whether it's 0.2, 0.5 or a second you still won't be able to overtake the car in front. Bottas said it's not a big advantage and that's pretty obvious but to see Vettel have DRS for consecutive laps and keep within 1.7 seconds makes me wonder what the gap was.

Ferrari looked faster in the first stint, but it doesn't look there was a lot in it and it was only in Vettel's hands - Kimi couldn't keep up. I'm not sure it's that clear cut after the first stop

Kimi was stuck behind Verstappen realising he had no chance to pass, I don't understand how you are able to judge a driver's pace like that?
That's fair enough I was trying to remember whether Kimi stayed ahead of Verstappen or not and I got that wrong, sorry. Still don't think stint 2 was that clear, though. I think on the Mediums the cars were closer


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2772
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.

Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


I'm pretty sure Vettel was holding back in the first stint, I have heard Wolff say Vettel was holding back which would go with reports I have read saying Ferrari was fuel saving and losing behind 0.1 - 0.3 a lap to Bottas in sector 3 because of this. I have also read Vettel was just driving to delta and Ferrari miscalculated the gap just like Mercedes in Aus. IMO Vettel had more time in his pocket but then of course Bottas might have had about more time.

Ferrari was faster in race pace at China, don't think that can be disputed, how big the gap was would be quite interesting, problem is whether it's 0.2, 0.5 or a second you still won't be able to overtake the car in front. Bottas said it's not a big advantage and that's pretty obvious but to see Vettel have DRS for consecutive laps and keep within 1.7 seconds makes me wonder what the gap was.

Ferrari looked faster in the first stint, but it doesn't look there was a lot in it and it was only in Vettel's hands - Kimi couldn't keep up. I'm not sure it's that clear cut after the first stop


Losing 0.1 - 0.3 down the main straight in sector 3 per lap for fuel saving will add up, Ferrari lose this from quali to the race. Plus Vettel was running to delta, he was never pushing more than he needed but going to the times Ferrari believed would be enough, they got it wrong. Kimi was behind Max in the first stint.

What Vettel did after the pitstops showed again Ferrari had better pace, I'm just interested how much because he was able to keep the gap small and stay in the DRS, but then the Ferrari is better in the dirty air. I dont think the gap is massive, certainly not enough to overtake but Ferrari was the faster car for me. Like others I would have it 1 race each atm. Mark Hughes said the Red Bull was the quickest in China, I'm hoping they can join the party and get Dan Ric a title shot.

_________________
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: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23178
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.

Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


I'm pretty sure Vettel was holding back in the first stint, I have heard Wolff say Vettel was holding back which would go with reports I have read saying Ferrari was fuel saving and losing behind 0.1 - 0.3 a lap to Bottas in sector 3 because of this. I have also read Vettel was just driving to delta and Ferrari miscalculated the gap just like Mercedes in Aus. IMO Vettel had more time in his pocket but then of course Bottas might have had about more time.

Ferrari was faster in race pace at China, don't think that can be disputed, how big the gap was would be quite interesting, problem is whether it's 0.2, 0.5 or a second you still won't be able to overtake the car in front. Bottas said it's not a big advantage and that's pretty obvious but to see Vettel have DRS for consecutive laps and keep within 1.7 seconds makes me wonder what the gap was.

Ferrari looked faster in the first stint, but it doesn't look there was a lot in it and it was only in Vettel's hands - Kimi couldn't keep up. I'm not sure it's that clear cut after the first stop


Losing 0.1 - 0.3 down the main straight in sector 3 per lap for fuel saving will add up, Ferrari lose this from quali to the race. Plus Vettel was running to delta, he was never pushing more than he needed but going to the times Ferrari believed would be enough, they got it wrong. Kimi was behind Max in the first stint.

What Vettel did after the pitstops showed again Ferrari had better pace, I'm just interested how much because he was able to keep the gap small and stay in the DRS, but then the Ferrari is better in the dirty air. I dont think the gap is massive, certainly not enough to overtake but Ferrari was the faster car for me. Like others I would have it 1 race each atm. Mark Hughes said the Red Bull was the quickest in China, I'm hoping they can join the party and get Dan Ric a title shot.

I'm happy saying Ferrari were quicker in the first stint, but I still don't see the 2nd stint is an open and shut case. It's possible Bottas was also running to a delta as he pitted very early and had to conserve his tyres. He upped his pace quite significantly once Vettel wasn't breathing down his neck.

Understand I'm not saying Ferrari definitely weren't quicker, but I don't think the evidence is conclusive either way (on the Mediums). I will say Ferrari had the advantage granted by qualifying (they were clearly superior) and they blew it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2772
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

I'm pretty sure Vettel was holding back in the first stint, I have heard Wolff say Vettel was holding back which would go with reports I have read saying Ferrari was fuel saving and losing behind 0.1 - 0.3 a lap to Bottas in sector 3 because of this. I have also read Vettel was just driving to delta and Ferrari miscalculated the gap just like Mercedes in Aus. IMO Vettel had more time in his pocket but then of course Bottas might have had about more time.

Ferrari was faster in race pace at China, don't think that can be disputed, how big the gap was would be quite interesting, problem is whether it's 0.2, 0.5 or a second you still won't be able to overtake the car in front. Bottas said it's not a big advantage and that's pretty obvious but to see Vettel have DRS for consecutive laps and keep within 1.7 seconds makes me wonder what the gap was.

Ferrari looked faster in the first stint, but it doesn't look there was a lot in it and it was only in Vettel's hands - Kimi couldn't keep up. I'm not sure it's that clear cut after the first stop


Losing 0.1 - 0.3 down the main straight in sector 3 per lap for fuel saving will add up, Ferrari lose this from quali to the race. Plus Vettel was running to delta, he was never pushing more than he needed but going to the times Ferrari believed would be enough, they got it wrong. Kimi was behind Max in the first stint.

What Vettel did after the pitstops showed again Ferrari had better pace, I'm just interested how much because he was able to keep the gap small and stay in the DRS, but then the Ferrari is better in the dirty air. I dont think the gap is massive, certainly not enough to overtake but Ferrari was the faster car for me. Like others I would have it 1 race each atm. Mark Hughes said the Red Bull was the quickest in China, I'm hoping they can join the party and get Dan Ric a title shot.

I'm happy saying Ferrari were quicker in the first stint, but I still don't see the 2nd stint is an open and shut case. It's possible Bottas was also running to a delta as he pitted very early and had to conserve his tyres. He upped his pace quite significantly once Vettel wasn't breathing down his neck.

Understand I'm not saying Ferrari definitely weren't quicker, but I don't think the evidence is conclusive either way (on the Mediums). I will say Ferrari had the advantage granted by qualifying (they were clearly superior) and they blew it.


I just think why would you let Vettel run so close, but you could be correct as overtaking just wasn't happening. I read James Vowles say cars was just not overtaking in the first stint and that's why they kept Hamilton out, but what I don't understand is Di Resta was convinced the best thing you could do was pit and did not understand why Hamilton wasn't pitted, like he said about putting on new mediums and getting the undercut. He was proven right with both.

_________________
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: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
Posts: 643
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

I'm pretty sure Vettel was holding back in the first stint, I have heard Wolff say Vettel was holding back which would go with reports I have read saying Ferrari was fuel saving and losing behind 0.1 - 0.3 a lap to Bottas in sector 3 because of this. I have also read Vettel was just driving to delta and Ferrari miscalculated the gap just like Mercedes in Aus. IMO Vettel had more time in his pocket but then of course Bottas might have had about more time.

Ferrari was faster in race pace at China, don't think that can be disputed, how big the gap was would be quite interesting, problem is whether it's 0.2, 0.5 or a second you still won't be able to overtake the car in front. Bottas said it's not a big advantage and that's pretty obvious but to see Vettel have DRS for consecutive laps and keep within 1.7 seconds makes me wonder what the gap was.

Ferrari looked faster in the first stint, but it doesn't look there was a lot in it and it was only in Vettel's hands - Kimi couldn't keep up. I'm not sure it's that clear cut after the first stop


Losing 0.1 - 0.3 down the main straight in sector 3 per lap for fuel saving will add up, Ferrari lose this from quali to the race. Plus Vettel was running to delta, he was never pushing more than he needed but going to the times Ferrari believed would be enough, they got it wrong. Kimi was behind Max in the first stint.

What Vettel did after the pitstops showed again Ferrari had better pace, I'm just interested how much because he was able to keep the gap small and stay in the DRS, but then the Ferrari is better in the dirty air. I dont think the gap is massive, certainly not enough to overtake but Ferrari was the faster car for me. Like others I would have it 1 race each atm. Mark Hughes said the Red Bull was the quickest in China, I'm hoping they can join the party and get Dan Ric a title shot.

I'm happy saying Ferrari were quicker in the first stint, but I still don't see the 2nd stint is an open and shut case. It's possible Bottas was also running to a delta as he pitted very early and had to conserve his tyres. He upped his pace quite significantly once Vettel wasn't breathing down his neck.

Understand I'm not saying Ferrari definitely weren't quicker, but I don't think the evidence is conclusive either way (on the Mediums). I will say Ferrari had the advantage granted by qualifying (they were clearly superior) and they blew it.


I just think why would you let Vettel run so close, but you could be correct as overtaking just wasn't happening. I read James Vowles say cars was just not overtaking in the first stint and that's why they kept Hamilton out, but what I don't understand is Di Resta was convinced the best thing you could do was pit and did not understand why Hamilton wasn't pitted, like he said about putting on new mediums and getting the undercut. He was proven right with both.


The difference a set of new tyres make this year seems to be massive.
Just in the previous race in Bahrain it was clear to see when Vettel just breezed past Lewis after his stop.
The thing that keeps coming up in my mind is Mercedes reluctance to give either driver a strategy to get him passed his teammate.
I think Mercedes could well have thought Lewis on fresh tyres would have challenged Bottas for the win and they were not willing to do that.
Well Ricciardo did it anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6255
Laz_T800 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.

Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


Regarding the BIB. One also might say that Kimi has been right up there with Seb so far this season.
Seb has been head and shoulders above Kim in recent years so are we to assume that an on form Seb would take the Ferrari even further ahead.
I find it difficult to understand why people try and manufacture a reason for the the obvious answer not to be the right one.
Sometimes a driver that is usually the slower will just hook everything up and get the best out of the package.

True about Seb, Kimi seems to be up there pretty much, but as always with Kimi, it seems that he fades a bit in the race.

But I don't get it, what am I manufacturing? Your answer contains the bold part above; "sometimes" the slower driver gets everything together and shines, which is true. But so far Bottas has had the measure of his team mate in both "normal" races they had (I am not counting Australia here), not just sometimes, so I'd say that yes, Lewis is under performing. It is a very small pool indeed, just two races, but this is not the standard that Hamilton has set for himself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2772
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.

Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


Regarding the BIB. One also might say that Kimi has been right up there with Seb so far this season.
Seb has been head and shoulders above Kim in recent years so are we to assume that an on form Seb would take the Ferrari even further ahead.
I find it difficult to understand why people try and manufacture a reason for the the obvious answer not to be the right one.
Sometimes a driver that is usually the slower will just hook everything up and get the best out of the package.

True about Seb, Kimi seems to be up there pretty much, but as always with Kimi, it seems that he fades a bit in the race.

But I don't get it, what am I manufacturing? Your answer contains the bold part above; "sometimes" the slower driver gets everything together and shines, which is true. But so far Bottas has had the measure of his team mate in both "normal" races they had (I am not counting Australia here), not just sometimes, so I'd say that yes, Lewis is under performing. It is a very small pool indeed, just two races, but this is not the standard that Hamilton has set for himself.


Kimi was unlucky in the last race, got a good start and had to back off. After that he was always losing a place to Bottas then had Max on US tyres to deal with. Then his race was finished after Bottas got the undercut, funnily enough only one team could predict what would happen after the SC and Kimi could have won the race if Ferrari pitted him for fresh softs, they was never going to do that though.

_________________
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: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26847
Laz_T800 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Ferrari looked faster in the first stint, but it doesn't look there was a lot in it and it was only in Vettel's hands - Kimi couldn't keep up. I'm not sure it's that clear cut after the first stop


Losing 0.1 - 0.3 down the main straight in sector 3 per lap for fuel saving will add up, Ferrari lose this from quali to the race. Plus Vettel was running to delta, he was never pushing more than he needed but going to the times Ferrari believed would be enough, they got it wrong. Kimi was behind Max in the first stint.

What Vettel did after the pitstops showed again Ferrari had better pace, I'm just interested how much because he was able to keep the gap small and stay in the DRS, but then the Ferrari is better in the dirty air. I dont think the gap is massive, certainly not enough to overtake but Ferrari was the faster car for me. Like others I would have it 1 race each atm. Mark Hughes said the Red Bull was the quickest in China, I'm hoping they can join the party and get Dan Ric a title shot.

I'm happy saying Ferrari were quicker in the first stint, but I still don't see the 2nd stint is an open and shut case. It's possible Bottas was also running to a delta as he pitted very early and had to conserve his tyres. He upped his pace quite significantly once Vettel wasn't breathing down his neck.

Understand I'm not saying Ferrari definitely weren't quicker, but I don't think the evidence is conclusive either way (on the Mediums). I will say Ferrari had the advantage granted by qualifying (they were clearly superior) and they blew it.


I just think why would you let Vettel run so close, but you could be correct as overtaking just wasn't happening. I read James Vowles say cars was just not overtaking in the first stint and that's why they kept Hamilton out, but what I don't understand is Di Resta was convinced the best thing you could do was pit and did not understand why Hamilton wasn't pitted, like he said about putting on new mediums and getting the undercut. He was proven right with both.


The difference a set of new tyres make this year seems to be massive.
Just in the previous race in Bahrain it was clear to see when Vettel just breezed past Lewis after his stop.
The thing that keeps coming up in my mind is Mercedes reluctance to give either driver a strategy to get him passed his teammate.
I think Mercedes could well have thought Lewis on fresh tyres would have challenged Bottas for the win and they were not willing to do that.
Well Ricciardo did it anyway.

I think I mentioned this as well in another thread, did Mercedes not want to give Hamilton an unfair advantage on Bottas, likewise Ferrari didn't really want to give Kimi the opportunity of beating Vettel?

What's quite telling is that both Vettel and Bottas were not happy that they weren't able to be given the opportunity to change their tyres under the SC, now why would they think that their tyres would have been changed when their teammates tyres were left on?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26847
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.

Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


Regarding the BIB. One also might say that Kimi has been right up there with Seb so far this season.
Seb has been head and shoulders above Kim in recent years so are we to assume that an on form Seb would take the Ferrari even further ahead.
I find it difficult to understand why people try and manufacture a reason for the the obvious answer not to be the right one.
Sometimes a driver that is usually the slower will just hook everything up and get the best out of the package.

True about Seb, Kimi seems to be up there pretty much, but as always with Kimi, it seems that he fades a bit in the race.

But I don't get it, what am I manufacturing? Your answer contains the bold part above; "sometimes" the slower driver gets everything together and shines, which is true. But so far Bottas has had the measure of his team mate in both "normal" races they had (I am not counting Australia here), not just sometimes, so I'd say that yes, Lewis is under performing. It is a very small pool indeed, just two races, but this is not the standard that Hamilton has set for himself.

In Bahrain Bottas started 3rd and Hamilton 9th with the grid penalty but only finished 5 seconds behind Bottas, that's a bit like comparing apples with pears.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2772
Laz_T800 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Losing 0.1 - 0.3 down the main straight in sector 3 per lap for fuel saving will add up, Ferrari lose this from quali to the race. Plus Vettel was running to delta, he was never pushing more than he needed but going to the times Ferrari believed would be enough, they got it wrong. Kimi was behind Max in the first stint.

What Vettel did after the pitstops showed again Ferrari had better pace, I'm just interested how much because he was able to keep the gap small and stay in the DRS, but then the Ferrari is better in the dirty air. I dont think the gap is massive, certainly not enough to overtake but Ferrari was the faster car for me. Like others I would have it 1 race each atm. Mark Hughes said the Red Bull was the quickest in China, I'm hoping they can join the party and get Dan Ric a title shot.

I'm happy saying Ferrari were quicker in the first stint, but I still don't see the 2nd stint is an open and shut case. It's possible Bottas was also running to a delta as he pitted very early and had to conserve his tyres. He upped his pace quite significantly once Vettel wasn't breathing down his neck.

Understand I'm not saying Ferrari definitely weren't quicker, but I don't think the evidence is conclusive either way (on the Mediums). I will say Ferrari had the advantage granted by qualifying (they were clearly superior) and they blew it.


I just think why would you let Vettel run so close, but you could be correct as overtaking just wasn't happening. I read James Vowles say cars was just not overtaking in the first stint and that's why they kept Hamilton out, but what I don't understand is Di Resta was convinced the best thing you could do was pit and did not understand why Hamilton wasn't pitted, like he said about putting on new mediums and getting the undercut. He was proven right with both.


The difference a set of new tyres make this year seems to be massive.
Just in the previous race in Bahrain it was clear to see when Vettel just breezed past Lewis after his stop.
The thing that keeps coming up in my mind is Mercedes reluctance to give either driver a strategy to get him passed his teammate.
I think Mercedes could well have thought Lewis on fresh tyres would have challenged Bottas for the win and they were not willing to do that.
Well Ricciardo did it anyway.


People like to call it a conspiracy theory but it's not, we have known for years Mercedes like to run the same strategy for both cars. With Ferrari its obvious why Kimi wasn't pitted. I'm glad Red Bull was rewarded for using common sense rather than a computer.

_________________
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: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9238
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
I think they're close enough to have the drivers make the difference which is what most of us want anyway right?

Like last year?

Well yes or are you seeing both Mercedes drivers in the top2 of the championship followed by 2 Ferrari drivers in last year's results?

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23178
pokerman wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Losing 0.1 - 0.3 down the main straight in sector 3 per lap for fuel saving will add up, Ferrari lose this from quali to the race. Plus Vettel was running to delta, he was never pushing more than he needed but going to the times Ferrari believed would be enough, they got it wrong. Kimi was behind Max in the first stint.

What Vettel did after the pitstops showed again Ferrari had better pace, I'm just interested how much because he was able to keep the gap small and stay in the DRS, but then the Ferrari is better in the dirty air. I dont think the gap is massive, certainly not enough to overtake but Ferrari was the faster car for me. Like others I would have it 1 race each atm. Mark Hughes said the Red Bull was the quickest in China, I'm hoping they can join the party and get Dan Ric a title shot.

I'm happy saying Ferrari were quicker in the first stint, but I still don't see the 2nd stint is an open and shut case. It's possible Bottas was also running to a delta as he pitted very early and had to conserve his tyres. He upped his pace quite significantly once Vettel wasn't breathing down his neck.

Understand I'm not saying Ferrari definitely weren't quicker, but I don't think the evidence is conclusive either way (on the Mediums). I will say Ferrari had the advantage granted by qualifying (they were clearly superior) and they blew it.


I just think why would you let Vettel run so close, but you could be correct as overtaking just wasn't happening. I read James Vowles say cars was just not overtaking in the first stint and that's why they kept Hamilton out, but what I don't understand is Di Resta was convinced the best thing you could do was pit and did not understand why Hamilton wasn't pitted, like he said about putting on new mediums and getting the undercut. He was proven right with both.


The difference a set of new tyres make this year seems to be massive.
Just in the previous race in Bahrain it was clear to see when Vettel just breezed past Lewis after his stop.
The thing that keeps coming up in my mind is Mercedes reluctance to give either driver a strategy to get him passed his teammate.
I think Mercedes could well have thought Lewis on fresh tyres would have challenged Bottas for the win and they were not willing to do that.
Well Ricciardo did it anyway.

I think I mentioned this as well in another thread, did Mercedes not want to give Hamilton an unfair advantage on Bottas, likewise Ferrari didn't really want to give Kimi the opportunity of beating Vettel?

What's quite telling is that both Vettel and Bottas were not happy that they weren't able to be given the opportunity to change their tyres under the SC, now why would they think that their tyres would have been changed when their teammates tyres were left on?
I doubt either would have been thinking of their team mates when they said that, tbh. They were fighting for the lead and lost the opportunity to convert it. That's all that would have been on their minds


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23178
F1_Ernie wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Losing 0.1 - 0.3 down the main straight in sector 3 per lap for fuel saving will add up, Ferrari lose this from quali to the race. Plus Vettel was running to delta, he was never pushing more than he needed but going to the times Ferrari believed would be enough, they got it wrong. Kimi was behind Max in the first stint.

What Vettel did after the pitstops showed again Ferrari had better pace, I'm just interested how much because he was able to keep the gap small and stay in the DRS, but then the Ferrari is better in the dirty air. I dont think the gap is massive, certainly not enough to overtake but Ferrari was the faster car for me. Like others I would have it 1 race each atm. Mark Hughes said the Red Bull was the quickest in China, I'm hoping they can join the party and get Dan Ric a title shot.

I'm happy saying Ferrari were quicker in the first stint, but I still don't see the 2nd stint is an open and shut case. It's possible Bottas was also running to a delta as he pitted very early and had to conserve his tyres. He upped his pace quite significantly once Vettel wasn't breathing down his neck.

Understand I'm not saying Ferrari definitely weren't quicker, but I don't think the evidence is conclusive either way (on the Mediums). I will say Ferrari had the advantage granted by qualifying (they were clearly superior) and they blew it.


I just think why would you let Vettel run so close, but you could be correct as overtaking just wasn't happening. I read James Vowles say cars was just not overtaking in the first stint and that's why they kept Hamilton out, but what I don't understand is Di Resta was convinced the best thing you could do was pit and did not understand why Hamilton wasn't pitted, like he said about putting on new mediums and getting the undercut. He was proven right with both.


The difference a set of new tyres make this year seems to be massive.
Just in the previous race in Bahrain it was clear to see when Vettel just breezed past Lewis after his stop.
The thing that keeps coming up in my mind is Mercedes reluctance to give either driver a strategy to get him passed his teammate.
I think Mercedes could well have thought Lewis on fresh tyres would have challenged Bottas for the win and they were not willing to do that.
Well Ricciardo did it anyway.


People like to call it a conspiracy theory but it's not, we have known for years Mercedes like to run the same strategy for both cars. With Ferrari its obvious why Kimi wasn't pitted. I'm glad Red Bull was rewarded for using common sense rather than a computer.

we've only known during the domination years, when they were virtually guaranteed 1-2s. Given their relative positions in the last race I would be extremely surprised if they allowed that kind of thinking to affect their pit stop decision-making.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6255
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Its pretty clear at present that the fastest car is the the Ferrari.
The last race Ferrari had Bottas well under control, 3.5 secs was enough of a gap to have pitted and returned without Bottas being able to undercut Vettel.
Mistakes stopped that from happening.
Seb was then able to crawl all over the back of Bottas right up to the safety car deployment.
In these cars you just don't do that without having the faster car.

It's a shame Lamos balanced and well thought out posting has been lost to the forum.
I learn't early on to ignore posters whose main talent was belligerence.

Agreed, the Ferrari looks the fastest at the moment, but I wonder if that has something to do with Lewis's sub-par form lately. My thinking is that if Bottas, the worse of the two Mercedes drivers, is doing ok and he is right up there with Vettel, then a strong Hamilton would maybe make the Merc look better than the Ferrari. The undercut lost was purely a Ferrari fault, not to take anything from the brilliant Merc pit stop team and Bottas's laps. They should have covered it better.

Re your last sentence, Zoue is the last poster I would call as having belligerence as a main talent. Lamo got irked by being called out (not sure if he was right or wrong), but to just leave the site seems like an overreaction. He's one of the more knowledgeable posters and I hope he'd reconsider, but in any case, life goes on.


Regarding the BIB. One also might say that Kimi has been right up there with Seb so far this season.
Seb has been head and shoulders above Kim in recent years so are we to assume that an on form Seb would take the Ferrari even further ahead.
I find it difficult to understand why people try and manufacture a reason for the the obvious answer not to be the right one.
Sometimes a driver that is usually the slower will just hook everything up and get the best out of the package.

True about Seb, Kimi seems to be up there pretty much, but as always with Kimi, it seems that he fades a bit in the race.

But I don't get it, what am I manufacturing? Your answer contains the bold part above; "sometimes" the slower driver gets everything together and shines, which is true. But so far Bottas has had the measure of his team mate in both "normal" races they had (I am not counting Australia here), not just sometimes, so I'd say that yes, Lewis is under performing. It is a very small pool indeed, just two races, but this is not the standard that Hamilton has set for himself.

In Bahrain Bottas started 3rd and Hamilton 9th with the grid penalty but only finished 5 seconds behind Bottas, that's a bit like comparing apples with pears.


He qualified behind Bottas, he finished behind Bottas, you seem to keep forgetting this. Without his penalty who knows what would have happened


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: Google Adsense [Bot], Lt. Drebin, Toby. 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