planetf1.com

It is currently Fri Nov 16, 2018 8:39 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 4:37 pm
Posts: 568
Rockie wrote:
BMWSauber84 wrote:
ohwell wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Bentrovato wrote:
Vettel is the prototypical German. Give him pole position and he'll carefully guide these tyre conservation machines (F1 race cars) across the line first more times than not. Vettel's strength isn't challenging a better car in inferior equipment and that's probably why we saw more mistakes from him this year.

Two things I agree with that have already been said:
1. Vettel made far too many poor judgements this season but it didn't matter because ...
2. Ferrari was no match for the Mercedes anyway

You seem to be spreading the Ferrari inferior car opinion among different threads which includes the Mercedes sandbagging opinion.


Depending on how you look at it..one could say Mercedes was faster over the course of the season.
Ferrari only managed 6 pole positions this year while merc won 9.
Fastest laps Ferrari 3 merc 9. What stat do you have other than anecdotal evidence that says Ferrari was “generally faster” than merc this year ?


Fastest laps are almost meaningless in this day and age, Bottas got the most recent one when in a race he was lapped in.

Pole positions are perhaps a better metric, but again that doesn't always tell the entire story either, in Hungary and Belgium Merc got poles in wet qualifying sessions that surely would have been Vettel's in the dry. In that scenario we'd be talking an 8-7 pole lead for Ferrari.

Sometimes a driver can just pull out a stonking lap. Singapore for example, where Vettel himself said that Ferrari should have been on pole.

Obviously we can never know for sure which car was the fastest in all of these race weekends, but I think it is very clear that at worst the Ferrari was quick enough to give them a good opportunity at the title. Talk of either car veing castly superior to the other has to be total nonsense.


So one car can take pole both in the dry and wet and the other can only in the dry but the latter is the faster car got it.


The SF71H is more than capable of taking pole position in the wet.

In Hungary, Räikkönen was quickest on his first set of wets in Q3. But unfortunately, when on a fresher set towards the end of Q3, Ferrari sent him out behind traffic, in the spray of other cars, which impeded his lap.

"Overall this weekend the car has been really good in any conditions. In qualifying it was a bit tricky, but I enjoyed driving it a lot. The speed was there and the car was working well in wet conditions. Today we were more competitive in the rain than we had been in other places; it was nice, I was pleased because this hadn’t been our strongest point lately. In Q3 with used tyres we were fastest of all, but with the new set we were a bit unlucky with the traffic; we got stuck a bit behind another car and with all the spray we could not have a clear lap. There was nothing we could do, as we were limited on time. It’s a pity because there was a lot of grip on the new tyres: I’m sure we had the speed and everything else to get the pole, but we have to be positively happy that now we can actually challenge for the front in wet conditions.” (Räikkönen)

However, as has been suggested, perhaps this isn't the appropriate thread for this particular debate.

_________________
You just need to be accepted for who you are and be proud of who you are and that is what I'm trying to do.
Lewis Hamilton


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1648
BMWSauber84 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

So one car can take pole both in the dry and wet and the other can only in the dry but the latter is the faster car got it.



You talk about dry and wet weather pace like they are each an equal factor over the course of a season. Rain effects a small percentage of F1 races. Ferrari were quicker in Hungary and Belgium, but the rain suited Hamilton and Merc better. It doesn't change the fact that in normal racing conditions, Ferrari were stronger.


Well we didn't have normal race conditions for qualifying and the Mercs were fastest that weekend in qualifying and the race.

So its only in your alternate universe Ferrari were faster in hungary as FP1,2 and 3 count for nothing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1648
sandman1347 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

So one car can take pole both in the dry and wet and the other can only in the dry but the latter is the faster car got it.

The cars are not the factor that changes in the dry. It's the drivers that make the difference there.


Oh Bottas is a better wet weather driver I get you.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3074
Rockie wrote:
BMWSauber84 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

So one car can take pole both in the dry and wet and the other can only in the dry but the latter is the faster car got it.



You talk about dry and wet weather pace like they are each an equal factor over the course of a season. Rain effects a small percentage of F1 races. Ferrari were quicker in Hungary and Belgium, but the rain suited Hamilton and Merc better. It doesn't change the fact that in normal racing conditions, Ferrari were stronger.


Well we didn't have normal race conditions for qualifying and the Mercs were fastest that weekend in qualifying and the race.

So its only in your alternate universe Ferrari were faster in hungary as FP1,2 and 3 count for nothing.


Ferrari was quicker in the race. Vettel couldn't deliver in the rain in quali, he hasn't delivered all season in those conditions.

_________________
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: Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1648
F1_Ernie wrote:
Rockie wrote:
BMWSauber84 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

So one car can take pole both in the dry and wet and the other can only in the dry but the latter is the faster car got it.



You talk about dry and wet weather pace like they are each an equal factor over the course of a season. Rain effects a small percentage of F1 races. Ferrari were quicker in Hungary and Belgium, but the rain suited Hamilton and Merc better. It doesn't change the fact that in normal racing conditions, Ferrari were stronger.


Well we didn't have normal race conditions for qualifying and the Mercs were fastest that weekend in qualifying and the race.

So its only in your alternate universe Ferrari were faster in hungary as FP1,2 and 3 count for nothing.


Ferrari was quicker in the race. Vettel couldn't deliver in the rain in quali, he hasn't delivered all season in those conditions.


I'm sure he was, like he was quicker at Monaco too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3074
Rockie wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Rockie wrote:
BMWSauber84 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

So one car can take pole both in the dry and wet and the other can only in the dry but the latter is the faster car got it.



You talk about dry and wet weather pace like they are each an equal factor over the course of a season. Rain effects a small percentage of F1 races. Ferrari were quicker in Hungary and Belgium, but the rain suited Hamilton and Merc better. It doesn't change the fact that in normal racing conditions, Ferrari were stronger.


Well we didn't have normal race conditions for qualifying and the Mercs were fastest that weekend in qualifying and the race.

So its only in your alternate universe Ferrari were faster in hungary as FP1,2 and 3 count for nothing.


Ferrari was quicker in the race. Vettel couldn't deliver in the rain in quali, he hasn't delivered all season in those conditions.


I'm sure he was, like he was quicker at Monaco too.


Who was quicker?

_________________
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: Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Aren´t you doing the same?

Saying that Ferrari were sandbagging and could have gone quicker if they had wanted to?

Spreading the Mercedes inferior car opinion.

Whilst saying that Mercedes were quicker but chose to sandbag for the good of the sport is given a total pass by you?

Just pointing out the hypocrisy.

The hypocrisy of me also saying that Ferrari were sandbagging?

I have to wonder why you would give the Mercedes sandbagging post a complete pass and then just criticise my response to it?

_________________
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: Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
F1_Ernie wrote:
Rockie wrote:
BMWSauber84 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

So one car can take pole both in the dry and wet and the other can only in the dry but the latter is the faster car got it.



You talk about dry and wet weather pace like they are each an equal factor over the course of a season. Rain effects a small percentage of F1 races. Ferrari were quicker in Hungary and Belgium, but the rain suited Hamilton and Merc better. It doesn't change the fact that in normal racing conditions, Ferrari were stronger.


Well we didn't have normal race conditions for qualifying and the Mercs were fastest that weekend in qualifying and the race.

So its only in your alternate universe Ferrari were faster in hungary as FP1,2 and 3 count for nothing.


Ferrari was quicker in the race. Vettel couldn't deliver in the rain in quali, he hasn't delivered all season in those conditions.

Jolyon Palmer gives some thoughts on wet driving

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/46031254

_________________
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: Wed Oct 31, 2018 1:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9348
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Saying that Ferrari were sandbagging and could have gone quicker if they had wanted to?

Spreading the Mercedes inferior car opinion.

Whilst saying that Mercedes were quicker but chose to sandbag for the good of the sport is given a total pass by you?

Just pointing out the hypocrisy.

The hypocrisy of me also saying that Ferrari were sandbagging?

I have to wonder why you would give the Mercedes sandbagging post a complete pass and then just criticise my response to it?

I haven't seen any other person talk about sandbagging besides you so I can't really comment on that can I? What I did see was you hypocritically accuse someone of "spreading their opinion". I saw the irony in it and commented on it, I haven't seen anyone beside you talk about sandbagging so I'm not sure why you're so dead set on having me comment on that.

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1648
pokerman wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Rockie wrote:
BMWSauber84 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

So one car can take pole both in the dry and wet and the other can only in the dry but the latter is the faster car got it.



You talk about dry and wet weather pace like they are each an equal factor over the course of a season. Rain effects a small percentage of F1 races. Ferrari were quicker in Hungary and Belgium, but the rain suited Hamilton and Merc better. It doesn't change the fact that in normal racing conditions, Ferrari were stronger.


Well we didn't have normal race conditions for qualifying and the Mercs were fastest that weekend in qualifying and the race.

So its only in your alternate universe Ferrari were faster in hungary as FP1,2 and 3 count for nothing.


Ferrari was quicker in the race. Vettel couldn't deliver in the rain in quali, he hasn't delivered all season in those conditions.

Jolyon Palmer gives some thoughts on wet driving

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/46031254


Yup the tots of the guy who failed woefully in F1 is the gold standard now :lol: :lol: :lol:

I'm guessing the redbull drivers are crap as well since they were crap in the wet as well this year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 8:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6403
Location: Nebraska, USA
pokerman wrote:
Bentrovato wrote:
Vettel is the prototypical German. Give him pole position and he'll carefully guide these tyre conservation machines (F1 race cars) across the line first more times than not. Vettel's strength isn't challenging a better car in inferior equipment and that's probably why we saw more mistakes from him this year.

Two things I agree with that have already been said:
1. Vettel made far too many poor judgements this season but it didn't matter because ...
2. Ferrari was no match for the Mercedes anyway

You seem to be spreading the Ferrari inferior car opinion among different threads which includes the Mercedes sandbagging opinion.

Poker, some have been spreading the Mercedes inferior car opinion for nearly two years now...anything to denigrate Vettel and hype Lewis. Why is it not enough to celebrate Hamilton's fifth, without trying to belittle one competitors such as Vettel and Alonso? Of course painting the picture that Lewis won in an inferior car is yet another effort to blg up his already considerable accomplishments.

While this was certainly not a great year for Seb or Ferrari, one can argue that the Merc was a most competitive car...equal if not better all-around to Ferrari. Lewis has had superior equipment for the four previous years, and certainly highly competitive machinery this year...more power to him for delivering the results, he deserves the credit he gets for doing the job well.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 9:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5556
Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Bentrovato wrote:
Vettel is the prototypical German. Give him pole position and he'll carefully guide these tyre conservation machines (F1 race cars) across the line first more times than not. Vettel's strength isn't challenging a better car in inferior equipment and that's probably why we saw more mistakes from him this year.

Two things I agree with that have already been said:
1. Vettel made far too many poor judgements this season but it didn't matter because ...
2. Ferrari was no match for the Mercedes anyway

You seem to be spreading the Ferrari inferior car opinion among different threads which includes the Mercedes sandbagging opinion.

Poker, some have been spreading the Mercedes inferior car opinion for nearly two years now...anything to denigrate Vettel and hype Lewis. Why is it not enough to celebrate Hamilton's fifth, without trying to belittle one competitors such as Vettel and Alonso? Of course painting the picture that Lewis won in an inferior car is yet another effort to blg up his already considerable accomplishments.

While this was certainly not a great year for Seb or Ferrari, one can argue that the Merc was a most competitive car...equal if not better all-around to Ferrari. Lewis has had superior equipment for the four previous years, and certainly highly competitive machinery this year...more power to him for delivering the results, he deserves the credit he gets for doing the job well.

If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

Not that it's a surprise to see people do this. This happens pretty consistently. I've found that the empirical evidence counts for very little to most people. There isn't a credible argument out there that the Mercedes was the better car in 2018 and there are countless links provided throughout the matchup thread with evidence supporting the fact that Ferrari had the edge more often than not. Just because someone says something, that doesn't automatically make it credible. I can say that Andrew Luck is a better QB than Tom Brady or that Lonzo Ball is a better basketball player than Lebron James. As much though I'm free to express that opinion, it wouldn't carry much weight because the evidence simply wouldn't support it.

Anyway, I'd rather not escalate a disagreement but it's just become silly to see posts about the Mercedes being dominant when it's been two full years since that has been the case.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 1:19 pm
Posts: 319
Rockie wrote:
BMWSauber84 wrote:
Rockie wrote:

So one car can take pole both in the dry and wet and the other can only in the dry but the latter is the faster car got it.



You talk about dry and wet weather pace like they are each an equal factor over the course of a season. Rain effects a small percentage of F1 races. Ferrari were quicker in Hungary and Belgium, but the rain suited Hamilton and Merc better. It doesn't change the fact that in normal racing conditions, Ferrari were stronger.


Well we didn't have normal race conditions for qualifying and the Mercs were fastest that weekend in qualifying and the race.

So its only in your alternate universe Ferrari were faster in hungary as FP1,2 and 3 count for nothing.


Vettel topped FP2 and FP3. You are confusing yourself now I think.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6090
Location: Michigan, USA
sandman1347 wrote:
If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

The only thing I'd say to this is that it inevitably is about Vettel. As much as Hamilton won the title because of how well he drove, he also won the title because of how poorly Seb (at times) drove. You can't give a fair analysis of this year's title without focusing on both Hamilton and Vettel. If it was the case that Seb drove flawlessly and Lewis still pulled out the extra performance and beat him anyway, then maybe it could be only about Lewis.

_________________
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: Thu Nov 01, 2018 1:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Bentrovato wrote:
Vettel is the prototypical German. Give him pole position and he'll carefully guide these tyre conservation machines (F1 race cars) across the line first more times than not. Vettel's strength isn't challenging a better car in inferior equipment and that's probably why we saw more mistakes from him this year.

Two things I agree with that have already been said:
1. Vettel made far too many poor judgements this season but it didn't matter because ...
2. Ferrari was no match for the Mercedes anyway

You seem to be spreading the Ferrari inferior car opinion among different threads which includes the Mercedes sandbagging opinion.

Poker, some have been spreading the Mercedes inferior car opinion for nearly two years now...anything to denigrate Vettel and hype Lewis. Why is it not enough to celebrate Hamilton's fifth, without trying to belittle one competitors such as Vettel and Alonso? Of course painting the picture that Lewis won in an inferior car is yet another effort to blg up his already considerable accomplishments.

While this was certainly not a great year for Seb or Ferrari, one can argue that the Merc was a most competitive car...equal if not better all-around to Ferrari. Lewis has had superior equipment for the four previous years, and certainly highly competitive machinery this year...more power to him for delivering the results, he deserves the credit he gets for doing the job well.

Inferior Mercedes car for the last 2 years really, who was saying that the Mercedes was inferior last year, the debate was between the Mercedes being superior or equal to the Ferrari with some actually pushing the line that the Mercedes was actually dominant.

Sorry but for whatever you may accuse me of all I see is another post that is only prepared to question one side of the debate basically defending a poster who claims that the Mercedes had the superior car this year but were sandbagging to make things seem closer than what they really were.

Your own personal opinion is clearly that the Mercedes was better and so Bentrovato's views no matter how controversial are still more palatable than my views which happen to be a majority opinion from what I read and observe.

When I think about it's quite amazing that someone saying that Mercedes have been sandbagging this season is seen as just another Vettel bashing reply in response.

_________________
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)


Last edited by pokerman on Thu Nov 01, 2018 1:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 1:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

The only thing I'd say to this is that it inevitably is about Vettel. As much as Hamilton won the title because of how well he drove, he also won the title because of how poorly Seb (at times) drove. You can't give a fair analysis of this year's title without focusing on both Hamilton and Vettel. If it was the case that Seb drove flawlessly and Lewis still pulled out the extra performance and beat him anyway, then maybe it could be only about Lewis.

...but we are apparently not allowed to say that because then it's seen as Vettel bashing.

_________________
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: Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5556
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

The only thing I'd say to this is that it inevitably is about Vettel. As much as Hamilton won the title because of how well he drove, he also won the title because of how poorly Seb (at times) drove. You can't give a fair analysis of this year's title without focusing on both Hamilton and Vettel. If it was the case that Seb drove flawlessly and Lewis still pulled out the extra performance and beat him anyway, then maybe it could be only about Lewis.

I'm not saying that Lewis winning the championship had nothing to do with Vettel. I'm saying that pointing out that he won the championship while driving the slightly inferior car is not about bashing Vettel (as Blake claimed). It's about giving the proper credit where it's due to Hamilton.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 4:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6403
Location: Nebraska, USA
sandman1347 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

The only thing I'd say to this is that it inevitably is about Vettel. As much as Hamilton won the title because of how well he drove, he also won the title because of how poorly Seb (at times) drove. You can't give a fair analysis of this year's title without focusing on both Hamilton and Vettel. If it was the case that Seb drove flawlessly and Lewis still pulled out the extra performance and beat him anyway, then maybe it could be only about Lewis.

I'm not saying that Lewis winning the championship had nothing to do with Vettel. I'm saying that pointing out that he won the championship while driving the slightly inferior car is not about bashing Vettel (as Blake claimed). It's about giving the proper credit where it's due to Hamilton.


Hamilton gets the credit due him, and I gave him credit in the post that you referred to. where is this "lack of willingness to give credit where it is due" that you are claiming? There have been a great number of posts praising Hamilton's win, as there should be. BTW, in my post I also noted that it was not a good performance by Seb this year...not for Ferrari, I am indeed willing to acknowledge their 2018 failures. However, I am not totally convinced that the Merc was really inferior and therein lies the issue as it takes away the Lewis won in an inferior argument that some are trying to make into big deal. I'd think a well-earned fifth WDC would be enough.
:(

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6565
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

The only thing I'd say to this is that it inevitably is about Vettel. As much as Hamilton won the title because of how well he drove, he also won the title because of how poorly Seb (at times) drove. You can't give a fair analysis of this year's title without focusing on both Hamilton and Vettel. If it was the case that Seb drove flawlessly and Lewis still pulled out the extra performance and beat him anyway, then maybe it could be only about Lewis.

...but we are apparently not allowed to say that because then it's seen as Vettel bashing.

Same as the Hamilton thread. Official threads are like that you'll find


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6565
sandman1347 wrote:
Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Bentrovato wrote:
Vettel is the prototypical German. Give him pole position and he'll carefully guide these tyre conservation machines (F1 race cars) across the line first more times than not. Vettel's strength isn't challenging a better car in inferior equipment and that's probably why we saw more mistakes from him this year.

Two things I agree with that have already been said:
1. Vettel made far too many poor judgements this season but it didn't matter because ...
2. Ferrari was no match for the Mercedes anyway

You seem to be spreading the Ferrari inferior car opinion among different threads which includes the Mercedes sandbagging opinion.

Poker, some have been spreading the Mercedes inferior car opinion for nearly two years now...anything to denigrate Vettel and hype Lewis. Why is it not enough to celebrate Hamilton's fifth, without trying to belittle one competitors such as Vettel and Alonso? Of course painting the picture that Lewis won in an inferior car is yet another effort to blg up his already considerable accomplishments.

While this was certainly not a great year for Seb or Ferrari, one can argue that the Merc was a most competitive car...equal if not better all-around to Ferrari. Lewis has had superior equipment for the four previous years, and certainly highly competitive machinery this year...more power to him for delivering the results, he deserves the credit he gets for doing the job well.

If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

Not that it's a surprise to see people do this. This happens pretty consistently. I've found that the empirical evidence counts for very little to most people. There isn't a credible argument out there that the Mercedes was the better car in 2018 and there are countless links provided throughout the matchup thread with evidence supporting the fact that Ferrari had the edge more often than not. Just because someone says something, that doesn't automatically make it credible. I can say that Andrew Luck is a better QB than Tom Brady or that Lonzo Ball is a better basketball player than Lebron James. As much though I'm free to express that opinion, it wouldn't carry much weight because the evidence simply wouldn't support it.

Anyway, I'd rather not escalate a disagreement but it's just become silly to see posts about the Mercedes being dominant when it's been two full years since that has been the case.

I do not think that anyone in his right mind would say that the Mercedes was dominant.

But equally, the Mercedes hasn't been far off the Ferrari, it is the closest we have seen them for a while. Vettel did have mistakes, but he wasn't all that bad in driving overall. In many races they traded places, fastest times, etc. The cars seem pretty equal this year.

As for Ferrari being bulletproof, I remember one race for Ferrari DNF and two races that Mercedes had a DNF (for mechanical reasons). Ferrari being bulletproof is not really an argument, it is so close (at the moment, we still have 3 races left) on reliability. It's not like comparing Mercedes or Ferrari to RB.

So two sides, one claiming that their favourite driver won against a CLEARLY superior and bullet proof car while the other side claiming that the Ferrari is equal or maybe slightly better, but not as much as some fans make it to be.

So who are we to believe? I am inclined towards the second opinion. Ferrari looked faster in some races, maybe in the majority, but not a big gap as some people would make it sound. And certainly one less DNF does not make the Ferrari bullet proof, both cars were quite good on that respect.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6565
Blake wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

The only thing I'd say to this is that it inevitably is about Vettel. As much as Hamilton won the title because of how well he drove, he also won the title because of how poorly Seb (at times) drove. You can't give a fair analysis of this year's title without focusing on both Hamilton and Vettel. If it was the case that Seb drove flawlessly and Lewis still pulled out the extra performance and beat him anyway, then maybe it could be only about Lewis.

I'm not saying that Lewis winning the championship had nothing to do with Vettel. I'm saying that pointing out that he won the championship while driving the slightly inferior car is not about bashing Vettel (as Blake claimed). It's about giving the proper credit where it's due to Hamilton.


Hamilton gets the credit due him, and I gave him credit in the post that you referred to. where is this "lack of willingness to give credit where it is due" that you are claiming? There have been a great number of posts praising Hamilton's win, as there should be. BTW, in my post I also noted that it was not a good performance by Seb this year...not for Ferrari, I am indeed willing to acknowledge their 2018 failures. However, I am not totally convinced that the Merc was really inferior and therein lies the issue as it takes away the Lewis won in an inferior argument that some are trying to make into big deal. I'd think a well-earned fifth WDC would be enough.
:(

Hamilton started this trend, it's almost expected that some fans will claim the same. Just ask poor Damon Hill!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9348
Siao7 wrote:
Blake wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

The only thing I'd say to this is that it inevitably is about Vettel. As much as Hamilton won the title because of how well he drove, he also won the title because of how poorly Seb (at times) drove. You can't give a fair analysis of this year's title without focusing on both Hamilton and Vettel. If it was the case that Seb drove flawlessly and Lewis still pulled out the extra performance and beat him anyway, then maybe it could be only about Lewis.

I'm not saying that Lewis winning the championship had nothing to do with Vettel. I'm saying that pointing out that he won the championship while driving the slightly inferior car is not about bashing Vettel (as Blake claimed). It's about giving the proper credit where it's due to Hamilton.


Hamilton gets the credit due him, and I gave him credit in the post that you referred to. where is this "lack of willingness to give credit where it is due" that you are claiming? There have been a great number of posts praising Hamilton's win, as there should be. BTW, in my post I also noted that it was not a good performance by Seb this year...not for Ferrari, I am indeed willing to acknowledge their 2018 failures. However, I am not totally convinced that the Merc was really inferior and therein lies the issue as it takes away the Lewis won in an inferior argument that some are trying to make into big deal. I'd think a well-earned fifth WDC would be enough.
:(

Hamilton started this trend, it's almost expected that some fans will claim the same. Just ask poor Damon Hill!

Yes even his "Still I Rise" slogan speaks of poor Lewis having the entire world against him so it's kind of understandable that his fans have the same mindset of him being unfairly treated.

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6565
Covalent wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Blake wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
The only thing I'd say to this is that it inevitably is about Vettel. As much as Hamilton won the title because of how well he drove, he also won the title because of how poorly Seb (at times) drove. You can't give a fair analysis of this year's title without focusing on both Hamilton and Vettel. If it was the case that Seb drove flawlessly and Lewis still pulled out the extra performance and beat him anyway, then maybe it could be only about Lewis.

I'm not saying that Lewis winning the championship had nothing to do with Vettel. I'm saying that pointing out that he won the championship while driving the slightly inferior car is not about bashing Vettel (as Blake claimed). It's about giving the proper credit where it's due to Hamilton.


Hamilton gets the credit due him, and I gave him credit in the post that you referred to. where is this "lack of willingness to give credit where it is due" that you are claiming? There have been a great number of posts praising Hamilton's win, as there should be. BTW, in my post I also noted that it was not a good performance by Seb this year...not for Ferrari, I am indeed willing to acknowledge their 2018 failures. However, I am not totally convinced that the Merc was really inferior and therein lies the issue as it takes away the Lewis won in an inferior argument that some are trying to make into big deal. I'd think a well-earned fifth WDC would be enough.
:(

Hamilton started this trend, it's almost expected that some fans will claim the same. Just ask poor Damon Hill!

Yes even his "Still I Rise" slogan speaks of poor Lewis having the entire world against him so it's kind of understandable that his fans have the same mindset of him being unfairly treated.

It has been his "thing" for a while, from the "maybe it's because I'm black" to this. Everyone loves an underdog, but someone who acts as if they are an underdog? Not sure. I can't see an unfair treatment of Lewis in any way in F1. This year in fact he has been infallible, his best WDC, most deserved and surely his most celebrated. I've never seen so many Ferrari fans praising him. I have never seen his direct WDC opponent going to the Merc garage to congratulate them. Only respect for this year's achievement.

Which makes it all so much more weird.

Criticism about his personal lifestyle has been vast, but has nothing to do with his driving. In fact, he fuelled quite a lot of that, but I do not mind if a driver wants to have a quiet family time, run an iron man, race on another series or lead a playboy life outside F1. Unless of course it affects his driving. But apart from 2012, I do not think that Hamilton's driving has suffered by his personal life choices.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1648
Think this thread is being derailed, just like every other one with Hamilton the underdog winning against all odds.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3074
Rockie wrote:
Think this thread is being derailed, just like every other one with Hamilton the underdog winning against all odds.


Has anyone actually said this?

_________________
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 Nov 01, 2018 12:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:23 am
Posts: 2660
F1_Ernie wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Think this thread is being derailed, just like every other one with Hamilton the underdog winning against all odds.


Has anyone actually said this?
.

Was going to ask the same thing. Had a quick look through the recent posts but must have missed it. Assume it's there somewhere given the number of posters referencing it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3074
shoot999 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Think this thread is being derailed, just like every other one with Hamilton the underdog winning against all odds.


Has anyone actually said this?
.

Was going to ask the same thing. Had a quick look through the recent posts but must have missed it. Assume it's there somewhere given the number of posters referencing it.


If you dare mention Ferrari having the better car even if you think it's by the smallest margin then you automatically go into the "Hamilton the underdog winning against all odds" group, wow it's getting rather packed in here, is there any builders who can build an extension :lol:

_________________
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 Nov 01, 2018 12:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

The only thing I'd say to this is that it inevitably is about Vettel. As much as Hamilton won the title because of how well he drove, he also won the title because of how poorly Seb (at times) drove. You can't give a fair analysis of this year's title without focusing on both Hamilton and Vettel. If it was the case that Seb drove flawlessly and Lewis still pulled out the extra performance and beat him anyway, then maybe it could be only about Lewis.

...but we are apparently not allowed to say that because then it's seen as Vettel bashing.

Same as the Hamilton thread. Official threads are like that you'll find

Fair enough and it's easy to forget which thread you are in sometimes and it was another thread were the poster said that Mercedes were sandbagging the season.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Bentrovato wrote:
Vettel is the prototypical German. Give him pole position and he'll carefully guide these tyre conservation machines (F1 race cars) across the line first more times than not. Vettel's strength isn't challenging a better car in inferior equipment and that's probably why we saw more mistakes from him this year.

Two things I agree with that have already been said:
1. Vettel made far too many poor judgements this season but it didn't matter because ...
2. Ferrari was no match for the Mercedes anyway

You seem to be spreading the Ferrari inferior car opinion among different threads which includes the Mercedes sandbagging opinion.

Poker, some have been spreading the Mercedes inferior car opinion for nearly two years now...anything to denigrate Vettel and hype Lewis. Why is it not enough to celebrate Hamilton's fifth, without trying to belittle one competitors such as Vettel and Alonso? Of course painting the picture that Lewis won in an inferior car is yet another effort to blg up his already considerable accomplishments.

While this was certainly not a great year for Seb or Ferrari, one can argue that the Merc was a most competitive car...equal if not better all-around to Ferrari. Lewis has had superior equipment for the four previous years, and certainly highly competitive machinery this year...more power to him for delivering the results, he deserves the credit he gets for doing the job well.

If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

Not that it's a surprise to see people do this. This happens pretty consistently. I've found that the empirical evidence counts for very little to most people. There isn't a credible argument out there that the Mercedes was the better car in 2018 and there are countless links provided throughout the matchup thread with evidence supporting the fact that Ferrari had the edge more often than not. Just because someone says something, that doesn't automatically make it credible. I can say that Andrew Luck is a better QB than Tom Brady or that Lonzo Ball is a better basketball player than Lebron James. As much though I'm free to express that opinion, it wouldn't carry much weight because the evidence simply wouldn't support it.

Anyway, I'd rather not escalate a disagreement but it's just become silly to see posts about the Mercedes being dominant when it's been two full years since that has been the case.

I do not think that anyone in his right mind would say that the Mercedes was dominant.

But equally, the Mercedes hasn't been far off the Ferrari, it is the closest we have seen them for a while. Vettel did have mistakes, but he wasn't all that bad in driving overall. In many races they traded places, fastest times, etc. The cars seem pretty equal this year.

As for Ferrari being bulletproof, I remember one race for Ferrari DNF and two races that Mercedes had a DNF (for mechanical reasons). Ferrari being bulletproof is not really an argument, it is so close (at the moment, we still have 3 races left) on reliability. It's not like comparing Mercedes or Ferrari to RB.

So two sides, one claiming that their favourite driver won against a CLEARLY superior and bullet proof car while the other side claiming that the Ferrari is equal or maybe slightly better, but not as much as some fans make it to be.

So who are we to believe? I am inclined towards the second opinion. Ferrari looked faster in some races, maybe in the majority, but not a big gap as some people would make it sound. And certainly one less DNF does not make the Ferrari bullet proof, both cars were quite good on that respect.

I don't believe that anyone was saying there was a big gap but suggesting that the Ferrari was better more often than not gets interpreted sometimes as saying that the Ferrari was dominant.

Regarding reliability Vettel has had 100% reliability, the reliability of Kimi's car isn't relevant.

_________________
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: Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Covalent wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Blake wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
The only thing I'd say to this is that it inevitably is about Vettel. As much as Hamilton won the title because of how well he drove, he also won the title because of how poorly Seb (at times) drove. You can't give a fair analysis of this year's title without focusing on both Hamilton and Vettel. If it was the case that Seb drove flawlessly and Lewis still pulled out the extra performance and beat him anyway, then maybe it could be only about Lewis.

I'm not saying that Lewis winning the championship had nothing to do with Vettel. I'm saying that pointing out that he won the championship while driving the slightly inferior car is not about bashing Vettel (as Blake claimed). It's about giving the proper credit where it's due to Hamilton.


Hamilton gets the credit due him, and I gave him credit in the post that you referred to. where is this "lack of willingness to give credit where it is due" that you are claiming? There have been a great number of posts praising Hamilton's win, as there should be. BTW, in my post I also noted that it was not a good performance by Seb this year...not for Ferrari, I am indeed willing to acknowledge their 2018 failures. However, I am not totally convinced that the Merc was really inferior and therein lies the issue as it takes away the Lewis won in an inferior argument that some are trying to make into big deal. I'd think a well-earned fifth WDC would be enough.
:(

Hamilton started this trend, it's almost expected that some fans will claim the same. Just ask poor Damon Hill!

Yes even his "Still I Rise" slogan speaks of poor Lewis having the entire world against him so it's kind of understandable that his fans have the same mindset of him being unfairly treated.

I don't believe that neither you or I know exactly how Hamilton gets treated?

_________________
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: Thu Nov 01, 2018 2:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6565
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Blake wrote:
pokerman wrote:
You seem to be spreading the Ferrari inferior car opinion among different threads which includes the Mercedes sandbagging opinion.

Poker, some have been spreading the Mercedes inferior car opinion for nearly two years now...anything to denigrate Vettel and hype Lewis. Why is it not enough to celebrate Hamilton's fifth, without trying to belittle one competitors such as Vettel and Alonso? Of course painting the picture that Lewis won in an inferior car is yet another effort to blg up his already considerable accomplishments.

While this was certainly not a great year for Seb or Ferrari, one can argue that the Merc was a most competitive car...equal if not better all-around to Ferrari. Lewis has had superior equipment for the four previous years, and certainly highly competitive machinery this year...more power to him for delivering the results, he deserves the credit he gets for doing the job well.

If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

Not that it's a surprise to see people do this. This happens pretty consistently. I've found that the empirical evidence counts for very little to most people. There isn't a credible argument out there that the Mercedes was the better car in 2018 and there are countless links provided throughout the matchup thread with evidence supporting the fact that Ferrari had the edge more often than not. Just because someone says something, that doesn't automatically make it credible. I can say that Andrew Luck is a better QB than Tom Brady or that Lonzo Ball is a better basketball player than Lebron James. As much though I'm free to express that opinion, it wouldn't carry much weight because the evidence simply wouldn't support it.

Anyway, I'd rather not escalate a disagreement but it's just become silly to see posts about the Mercedes being dominant when it's been two full years since that has been the case.

I do not think that anyone in his right mind would say that the Mercedes was dominant.

But equally, the Mercedes hasn't been far off the Ferrari, it is the closest we have seen them for a while. Vettel did have mistakes, but he wasn't all that bad in driving overall. In many races they traded places, fastest times, etc. The cars seem pretty equal this year.

As for Ferrari being bulletproof, I remember one race for Ferrari DNF and two races that Mercedes had a DNF (for mechanical reasons). Ferrari being bulletproof is not really an argument, it is so close (at the moment, we still have 3 races left) on reliability. It's not like comparing Mercedes or Ferrari to RB.

So two sides, one claiming that their favourite driver won against a CLEARLY superior and bullet proof car while the other side claiming that the Ferrari is equal or maybe slightly better, but not as much as some fans make it to be.

So who are we to believe? I am inclined towards the second opinion. Ferrari looked faster in some races, maybe in the majority, but not a big gap as some people would make it sound. And certainly one less DNF does not make the Ferrari bullet proof, both cars were quite good on that respect.

I don't believe that anyone was saying there was a big gap but suggesting that the Ferrari was better more often than not gets interpreted sometimes as saying that the Ferrari was dominant.

Regarding reliability Vettel has had 100% reliability, the reliability of Kimi's car isn't relevant.


I do not think we mentioned Ferrari were dominant, nor Mercedes being dominant. They are just very close.

Regarding reliability, is Kimi driving another car? Ferrari vs Mercedes DNF is 1 to 2, it's as close as it gets to being equal. And the year is not finished yet


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 2:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6565
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Blake wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I'm not saying that Lewis winning the championship had nothing to do with Vettel. I'm saying that pointing out that he won the championship while driving the slightly inferior car is not about bashing Vettel (as Blake claimed). It's about giving the proper credit where it's due to Hamilton.


Hamilton gets the credit due him, and I gave him credit in the post that you referred to. where is this "lack of willingness to give credit where it is due" that you are claiming? There have been a great number of posts praising Hamilton's win, as there should be. BTW, in my post I also noted that it was not a good performance by Seb this year...not for Ferrari, I am indeed willing to acknowledge their 2018 failures. However, I am not totally convinced that the Merc was really inferior and therein lies the issue as it takes away the Lewis won in an inferior argument that some are trying to make into big deal. I'd think a well-earned fifth WDC would be enough.
:(

Hamilton started this trend, it's almost expected that some fans will claim the same. Just ask poor Damon Hill!

Yes even his "Still I Rise" slogan speaks of poor Lewis having the entire world against him so it's kind of understandable that his fans have the same mindset of him being unfairly treated.

I don't believe that neither you or I know exactly how Hamilton gets treated?

We know that he expressed his view of not being praised enough, didn't we?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9348
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Blake wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I'm not saying that Lewis winning the championship had nothing to do with Vettel. I'm saying that pointing out that he won the championship while driving the slightly inferior car is not about bashing Vettel (as Blake claimed). It's about giving the proper credit where it's due to Hamilton.


Hamilton gets the credit due him, and I gave him credit in the post that you referred to. where is this "lack of willingness to give credit where it is due" that you are claiming? There have been a great number of posts praising Hamilton's win, as there should be. BTW, in my post I also noted that it was not a good performance by Seb this year...not for Ferrari, I am indeed willing to acknowledge their 2018 failures. However, I am not totally convinced that the Merc was really inferior and therein lies the issue as it takes away the Lewis won in an inferior argument that some are trying to make into big deal. I'd think a well-earned fifth WDC would be enough.
:(

Hamilton started this trend, it's almost expected that some fans will claim the same. Just ask poor Damon Hill!

Yes even his "Still I Rise" slogan speaks of poor Lewis having the entire world against him so it's kind of understandable that his fans have the same mindset of him being unfairly treated.

I don't believe that neither you or I know exactly how Hamilton gets treated?

I'll quote you on that the next time you get all defend-y.

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5556
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

Not that it's a surprise to see people do this. This happens pretty consistently. I've found that the empirical evidence counts for very little to most people. There isn't a credible argument out there that the Mercedes was the better car in 2018 and there are countless links provided throughout the matchup thread with evidence supporting the fact that Ferrari had the edge more often than not. Just because someone says something, that doesn't automatically make it credible. I can say that Andrew Luck is a better QB than Tom Brady or that Lonzo Ball is a better basketball player than Lebron James. As much though I'm free to express that opinion, it wouldn't carry much weight because the evidence simply wouldn't support it.

Anyway, I'd rather not escalate a disagreement but it's just become silly to see posts about the Mercedes being dominant when it's been two full years since that has been the case.

I do not think that anyone in his right mind would say that the Mercedes was dominant.

But equally, the Mercedes hasn't been far off the Ferrari, it is the closest we have seen them for a while. Vettel did have mistakes, but he wasn't all that bad in driving overall. In many races they traded places, fastest times, etc. The cars seem pretty equal this year.

As for Ferrari being bulletproof, I remember one race for Ferrari DNF and two races that Mercedes had a DNF (for mechanical reasons). Ferrari being bulletproof is not really an argument, it is so close (at the moment, we still have 3 races left) on reliability. It's not like comparing Mercedes or Ferrari to RB.

So two sides, one claiming that their favourite driver won against a CLEARLY superior and bullet proof car while the other side claiming that the Ferrari is equal or maybe slightly better, but not as much as some fans make it to be.

So who are we to believe? I am inclined towards the second opinion. Ferrari looked faster in some races, maybe in the majority, but not a big gap as some people would make it sound. And certainly one less DNF does not make the Ferrari bullet proof, both cars were quite good on that respect.

I don't believe that anyone was saying there was a big gap but suggesting that the Ferrari was better more often than not gets interpreted sometimes as saying that the Ferrari was dominant.

Regarding reliability Vettel has had 100% reliability, the reliability of Kimi's car isn't relevant.


I do not think we mentioned Ferrari were dominant, nor Mercedes being dominant. They are just very close.

Regarding reliability, is Kimi driving another car? Ferrari vs Mercedes DNF is 1 to 2, it's as close as it gets to being equal. And the year is not finished yet

The problem comes in when you include the larger context. Last season the same things could be said about how close the cars were, yet we acknowledged that the Mercedes had the slim margin on the season despite the fact that Ferrari were better at several races. This season some people are not willing to do the same. That's the issue here. If we had to acknowledge the edge to Merc last year (no matter how slim) it's only right that we also acknowledge the edge to Ferrari this year (no matter how slim). That's just being consistent.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6565
sandman1347 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

Not that it's a surprise to see people do this. This happens pretty consistently. I've found that the empirical evidence counts for very little to most people. There isn't a credible argument out there that the Mercedes was the better car in 2018 and there are countless links provided throughout the matchup thread with evidence supporting the fact that Ferrari had the edge more often than not. Just because someone says something, that doesn't automatically make it credible. I can say that Andrew Luck is a better QB than Tom Brady or that Lonzo Ball is a better basketball player than Lebron James. As much though I'm free to express that opinion, it wouldn't carry much weight because the evidence simply wouldn't support it.

Anyway, I'd rather not escalate a disagreement but it's just become silly to see posts about the Mercedes being dominant when it's been two full years since that has been the case.

I do not think that anyone in his right mind would say that the Mercedes was dominant.

But equally, the Mercedes hasn't been far off the Ferrari, it is the closest we have seen them for a while. Vettel did have mistakes, but he wasn't all that bad in driving overall. In many races they traded places, fastest times, etc. The cars seem pretty equal this year.

As for Ferrari being bulletproof, I remember one race for Ferrari DNF and two races that Mercedes had a DNF (for mechanical reasons). Ferrari being bulletproof is not really an argument, it is so close (at the moment, we still have 3 races left) on reliability. It's not like comparing Mercedes or Ferrari to RB.

So two sides, one claiming that their favourite driver won against a CLEARLY superior and bullet proof car while the other side claiming that the Ferrari is equal or maybe slightly better, but not as much as some fans make it to be.

So who are we to believe? I am inclined towards the second opinion. Ferrari looked faster in some races, maybe in the majority, but not a big gap as some people would make it sound. And certainly one less DNF does not make the Ferrari bullet proof, both cars were quite good on that respect.

I don't believe that anyone was saying there was a big gap but suggesting that the Ferrari was better more often than not gets interpreted sometimes as saying that the Ferrari was dominant.

Regarding reliability Vettel has had 100% reliability, the reliability of Kimi's car isn't relevant.


I do not think we mentioned Ferrari were dominant, nor Mercedes being dominant. They are just very close.

Regarding reliability, is Kimi driving another car? Ferrari vs Mercedes DNF is 1 to 2, it's as close as it gets to being equal. And the year is not finished yet

The problem comes in when you include the larger context. Last season the same things could be said about how close the cars were, yet we acknowledged that the Mercedes had the slim margin on the season despite the fact that Ferrari were better at several races. This season some people are not willing to do the same. That's the issue here. If we had to acknowledge the edge to Merc last year (no matter how slim) it's only right that we also acknowledge the edge to Ferrari this year (no matter how slim). That's just being consistent.

I am not sure what you mean. I think by now most people agree that the Ferraris are slightly faster, just not by a huge margin. The AMUS ratings show exactly that, 10-7 isn't it? No car is way ahead of the other. But so far we have heard that Ferrari are dominant, Ferrari are clearly far ahead, Ferrari are just ahead overall, Mercedes are faster and (hilariously) that Mercedes are dominant...

I tend to think that Ferrari are slightly faster. But quite close in the large context


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 1:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Blake wrote:
Poker, some have been spreading the Mercedes inferior car opinion for nearly two years now...anything to denigrate Vettel and hype Lewis. Why is it not enough to celebrate Hamilton's fifth, without trying to belittle one competitors such as Vettel and Alonso? Of course painting the picture that Lewis won in an inferior car is yet another effort to blg up his already considerable accomplishments.

While this was certainly not a great year for Seb or Ferrari, one can argue that the Merc was a most competitive car...equal if not better all-around to Ferrari. Lewis has had superior equipment for the four previous years, and certainly highly competitive machinery this year...more power to him for delivering the results, he deserves the credit he gets for doing the job well.

If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

Not that it's a surprise to see people do this. This happens pretty consistently. I've found that the empirical evidence counts for very little to most people. There isn't a credible argument out there that the Mercedes was the better car in 2018 and there are countless links provided throughout the matchup thread with evidence supporting the fact that Ferrari had the edge more often than not. Just because someone says something, that doesn't automatically make it credible. I can say that Andrew Luck is a better QB than Tom Brady or that Lonzo Ball is a better basketball player than Lebron James. As much though I'm free to express that opinion, it wouldn't carry much weight because the evidence simply wouldn't support it.

Anyway, I'd rather not escalate a disagreement but it's just become silly to see posts about the Mercedes being dominant when it's been two full years since that has been the case.

I do not think that anyone in his right mind would say that the Mercedes was dominant.

But equally, the Mercedes hasn't been far off the Ferrari, it is the closest we have seen them for a while. Vettel did have mistakes, but he wasn't all that bad in driving overall. In many races they traded places, fastest times, etc. The cars seem pretty equal this year.

As for Ferrari being bulletproof, I remember one race for Ferrari DNF and two races that Mercedes had a DNF (for mechanical reasons). Ferrari being bulletproof is not really an argument, it is so close (at the moment, we still have 3 races left) on reliability. It's not like comparing Mercedes or Ferrari to RB.

So two sides, one claiming that their favourite driver won against a CLEARLY superior and bullet proof car while the other side claiming that the Ferrari is equal or maybe slightly better, but not as much as some fans make it to be.

So who are we to believe? I am inclined towards the second opinion. Ferrari looked faster in some races, maybe in the majority, but not a big gap as some people would make it sound. And certainly one less DNF does not make the Ferrari bullet proof, both cars were quite good on that respect.

I don't believe that anyone was saying there was a big gap but suggesting that the Ferrari was better more often than not gets interpreted sometimes as saying that the Ferrari was dominant.

Regarding reliability Vettel has had 100% reliability, the reliability of Kimi's car isn't relevant.


I do not think we mentioned Ferrari were dominant, nor Mercedes being dominant. They are just very close.

Regarding reliability, is Kimi driving another car? Ferrari vs Mercedes DNF is 1 to 2, it's as close as it gets to being equal. And the year is not finished yet

Reliability is not relevant in discussing which car has been quicker and certainly not a factor in Vettel not winning the title.

_________________
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: Fri Nov 02, 2018 1:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Blake wrote:
Hamilton gets the credit due him, and I gave him credit in the post that you referred to. where is this "lack of willingness to give credit where it is due" that you are claiming? There have been a great number of posts praising Hamilton's win, as there should be. BTW, in my post I also noted that it was not a good performance by Seb this year...not for Ferrari, I am indeed willing to acknowledge their 2018 failures. However, I am not totally convinced that the Merc was really inferior and therein lies the issue as it takes away the Lewis won in an inferior argument that some are trying to make into big deal. I'd think a well-earned fifth WDC would be enough.
:(

Hamilton started this trend, it's almost expected that some fans will claim the same. Just ask poor Damon Hill!

Yes even his "Still I Rise" slogan speaks of poor Lewis having the entire world against him so it's kind of understandable that his fans have the same mindset of him being unfairly treated.

I don't believe that neither you or I know exactly how Hamilton gets treated?

We know that he expressed his view of not being praised enough, didn't we?

Was it as simple as 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: Fri Nov 02, 2018 1:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Blake wrote:
Hamilton gets the credit due him, and I gave him credit in the post that you referred to. where is this "lack of willingness to give credit where it is due" that you are claiming? There have been a great number of posts praising Hamilton's win, as there should be. BTW, in my post I also noted that it was not a good performance by Seb this year...not for Ferrari, I am indeed willing to acknowledge their 2018 failures. However, I am not totally convinced that the Merc was really inferior and therein lies the issue as it takes away the Lewis won in an inferior argument that some are trying to make into big deal. I'd think a well-earned fifth WDC would be enough.
:(

Hamilton started this trend, it's almost expected that some fans will claim the same. Just ask poor Damon Hill!

Yes even his "Still I Rise" slogan speaks of poor Lewis having the entire world against him so it's kind of understandable that his fans have the same mindset of him being unfairly treated.

I don't believe that neither you or I know exactly how Hamilton gets treated?

I'll quote you on that the next time you get all defend-y.

Maybe I'm thinking too deeply into it, someone else said he simply wasn't getting praised enough?

_________________
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: Fri Nov 02, 2018 1:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
sandman1347 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
If I might interject for just a moment, there is a problem with what's happening now. All credible evidence points to the Ferrari being the slightly better car on the season and yet there are still, predictably, people trying to chalk up the championship to the car for Hamilton. The lack of willingness to give credit where it is due is the issue here. When someone wins the championship despite not driving the fastest car (nor the most reliable) that is something that should be acknowledged. It's not about Vettel. Has nothing to do with Vettel. It's about Hamilton and the season that he had.

Not that it's a surprise to see people do this. This happens pretty consistently. I've found that the empirical evidence counts for very little to most people. There isn't a credible argument out there that the Mercedes was the better car in 2018 and there are countless links provided throughout the matchup thread with evidence supporting the fact that Ferrari had the edge more often than not. Just because someone says something, that doesn't automatically make it credible. I can say that Andrew Luck is a better QB than Tom Brady or that Lonzo Ball is a better basketball player than Lebron James. As much though I'm free to express that opinion, it wouldn't carry much weight because the evidence simply wouldn't support it.

Anyway, I'd rather not escalate a disagreement but it's just become silly to see posts about the Mercedes being dominant when it's been two full years since that has been the case.

I do not think that anyone in his right mind would say that the Mercedes was dominant.

But equally, the Mercedes hasn't been far off the Ferrari, it is the closest we have seen them for a while. Vettel did have mistakes, but he wasn't all that bad in driving overall. In many races they traded places, fastest times, etc. The cars seem pretty equal this year.

As for Ferrari being bulletproof, I remember one race for Ferrari DNF and two races that Mercedes had a DNF (for mechanical reasons). Ferrari being bulletproof is not really an argument, it is so close (at the moment, we still have 3 races left) on reliability. It's not like comparing Mercedes or Ferrari to RB.

So two sides, one claiming that their favourite driver won against a CLEARLY superior and bullet proof car while the other side claiming that the Ferrari is equal or maybe slightly better, but not as much as some fans make it to be.

So who are we to believe? I am inclined towards the second opinion. Ferrari looked faster in some races, maybe in the majority, but not a big gap as some people would make it sound. And certainly one less DNF does not make the Ferrari bullet proof, both cars were quite good on that respect.

I don't believe that anyone was saying there was a big gap but suggesting that the Ferrari was better more often than not gets interpreted sometimes as saying that the Ferrari was dominant.

Regarding reliability Vettel has had 100% reliability, the reliability of Kimi's car isn't relevant.


I do not think we mentioned Ferrari were dominant, nor Mercedes being dominant. They are just very close.

Regarding reliability, is Kimi driving another car? Ferrari vs Mercedes DNF is 1 to 2, it's as close as it gets to being equal. And the year is not finished yet

The problem comes in when you include the larger context. Last season the same things could be said about how close the cars were, yet we acknowledged that the Mercedes had the slim margin on the season despite the fact that Ferrari were better at several races. This season some people are not willing to do the same. That's the issue here. If we had to acknowledge the edge to Merc last year (no matter how slim) it's only right that we also acknowledge the edge to Ferrari this year (no matter how slim). That's just being consistent.

Indeed it seemed that things were discussed down to the minutest detail last year, the cars were not allowed to be equal race on race, now it seems a general overview is good enough, the cars were close to equal.

_________________
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: Fri Nov 02, 2018 2:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28420
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
I do not think that anyone in his right mind would say that the Mercedes was dominant.

But equally, the Mercedes hasn't been far off the Ferrari, it is the closest we have seen them for a while. Vettel did have mistakes, but he wasn't all that bad in driving overall. In many races they traded places, fastest times, etc. The cars seem pretty equal this year.

As for Ferrari being bulletproof, I remember one race for Ferrari DNF and two races that Mercedes had a DNF (for mechanical reasons). Ferrari being bulletproof is not really an argument, it is so close (at the moment, we still have 3 races left) on reliability. It's not like comparing Mercedes or Ferrari to RB.

So two sides, one claiming that their favourite driver won against a CLEARLY superior and bullet proof car while the other side claiming that the Ferrari is equal or maybe slightly better, but not as much as some fans make it to be.

So who are we to believe? I am inclined towards the second opinion. Ferrari looked faster in some races, maybe in the majority, but not a big gap as some people would make it sound. And certainly one less DNF does not make the Ferrari bullet proof, both cars were quite good on that respect.

I don't believe that anyone was saying there was a big gap but suggesting that the Ferrari was better more often than not gets interpreted sometimes as saying that the Ferrari was dominant.

Regarding reliability Vettel has had 100% reliability, the reliability of Kimi's car isn't relevant.


I do not think we mentioned Ferrari were dominant, nor Mercedes being dominant. They are just very close.

Regarding reliability, is Kimi driving another car? Ferrari vs Mercedes DNF is 1 to 2, it's as close as it gets to being equal. And the year is not finished yet

The problem comes in when you include the larger context. Last season the same things could be said about how close the cars were, yet we acknowledged that the Mercedes had the slim margin on the season despite the fact that Ferrari were better at several races. This season some people are not willing to do the same. That's the issue here. If we had to acknowledge the edge to Merc last year (no matter how slim) it's only right that we also acknowledge the edge to Ferrari this year (no matter how slim). That's just being consistent.

I am not sure what you mean. I think by now most people agree that the Ferraris are slightly faster, just not by a huge margin. The AMUS ratings show exactly that, 10-7 isn't it? No car is way ahead of the other. But so far we have heard that Ferrari are dominant, Ferrari are clearly far ahead, Ferrari are just ahead overall, Mercedes are faster and (hilariously) that Mercedes are dominant...

I tend to think that Ferrari are slightly faster. But quite close in the large context

I'm just wondering who has been saying that Ferrari have been dominant, the twoing and froing is with some that will not concede any advantage to Ferrari.

I believe it's only today I said the same as you in the appropriate thread to a poster who was saying the cars have been equal, his response being who are these most people that believe otherwise?

_________________
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: No registered users 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