planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Oct 18, 2017 7:10 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 11:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1236
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
As for the implication that Lewis wants to gain a competitive advantage by banning data sharing, that's obvious and he even directly says so himself. So where's the implication of preferential treatment that people tripped over themselves to make? An example would be nice.

Read the very first reply and you'll see someone saying that it's Lewis asking to handicap Bottas

I grant you that it certainly could be read that way, and quite possibly was even meant that way. But Blinky's post is not representative of how most people responded to the thread, so focusing on it to the exclusion of all else and painting every with the same brush is hardly productive.

Even at that, I don't think he was really saying Lewis wants preferential treatment - Bottas would lose the ability to see Lewis' data, but Lewis would also lose the ability to see his. That's equal treatment. Many people - myself somewhat included - think this arrangement would benefit Lewis more, but it's still equal treatment. The only way for that lack of data sharing to result in preferential treatment for Hamilton would be if he got to see Bottas' data but Bottas didn't get to see his, which is not something Lewis has implied he wants.

Lewis sees himself as a more naturally talented driver than anyone else (most top drivers do), and as such he almost certainly believes he would benefit from the end of data sharing. But that's the only implication I would make - I wouldn't imply he wants to have access to data Bottas wouldn't.

But I do think it's hypocritical of him. He learned from Alonso's data (yes, not just his setups!) when he was starting out, and now he doesn't want anybody to do the same to him. That's not exactly fair.


True, although there are problems in comparing actions 10 or so years apart. It's hypocritical but that's quite a grudge in a sense (can't think of a better way to word it). Certainly, now that Hamilton is very well established and confident in himself, his stance has changed. Also it's probably not something he thought about terribly deeply on a wider and more holistic level when he was first entering the sport. Nonetheless, a clear example of hypocrisy over a long period. I have many such instances over way shorter periods. :] :] :]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 12:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4068
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
As for the implication that Lewis wants to gain a competitive advantage by banning data sharing, that's obvious and he even directly says so himself. So where's the implication of preferential treatment that people tripped over themselves to make? An example would be nice.

Read the very first reply and you'll see someone saying that it's Lewis asking to handicap Bottas

I grant you that it certainly could be read that way, and quite possibly was even meant that way. But Blinky's post is not representative of how most people responded to the thread, so focusing on it to the exclusion of all else and painting every with the same brush is hardly productive.

Even at that, I don't think he was really saying Lewis wants preferential treatment
- Bottas would lose the ability to see Lewis' data, but Lewis would also lose the ability to see his. That's equal treatment. Many people - myself somewhat included - think this arrangement would benefit Lewis more, but it's still equal treatment. The only way for that lack of data sharing to result in preferential treatment for Hamilton would be if he got to see Bottas' data but Bottas didn't get to see his, which is not something Lewis has implied he wants.

Lewis sees himself as a more naturally talented driver than anyone else (most top drivers do), and as such he almost certainly believes he would benefit from the end of data sharing. But that's the only implication I would make - I wouldn't imply he wants to have access to data Bottas wouldn't.

But I do think it's hypocritical of him. He learned from Alonso's data (yes, not just his setups!) when he was starting out, and now he doesn't want anybody to do the same to him. That's not exactly fair.

So I have to stop you here. To suggest that you you don't think he was saying that Lewis wanted preferential treatment when his exact words were, "Why does Hamilton fear Bottas? Why is he already campaigning to handicap the Finn?" is a bit disingenuous don't you think? How else could that be interpreted?

That comment was what started the initial disagreement in this thread and yes, people DID support him on that (just look at the first page). Your use of the red herring that Lewis learned from Alonso in 2007 is also a bit off-putting. Both Lewis and Alonso learned from each other's data that year as has been documented numerous times.

Anyway you are not discussing what he actually suggested. You are still responding to the click-bait-style headline which was designed to get people gossiping about Lewis (a goal it clearly managed to achieve).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 2:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4272
Location: Michigan, USA
sandman1347 wrote:
Anyway you are not discussing what he actually suggested. You are still responding to the click-bait-style headline which was designed to get people gossiping about Lewis (a goal it clearly managed to achieve).

I'll respond to this first: my very first post in this thread discusses exactly what Hamilton suggested, and shows my opinion of it:

Exediron wrote:
In the abstract, I agree with Hamilton; drivers should succeed or fail based on their skill, not their ability to mimic each other. Realistically however, there's no way to put the genii back in the bottle, and there's also no question that data sharing leads to better drivers. From a team perspective - and Hamilton often seems to lose sight of the fact that F1 is ultimately a team sport - having both drivers sharing data and improving is a no-brainer.

With that out of the way, on to the rest.

sandman1347 wrote:
So I have to stop you here. To suggest that you you don't think he was saying that Lewis wanted preferential treatment when his exact words were, "Why does Hamilton fear Bottas? Why is he already campaigning to handicap the Finn?" is a bit disingenuous don't you think? How else could that be interpreted?

That comment was what started the initial disagreement in this thread and yes, people DID support him on that (just look at the first page).

Okay, I admit that the language of Blinky's post was not very neutral. However, aside from that specific line, the rest of it is discussing the general implications of banning data sharing and how that hurts the team. I have looked over the first page, and it looks to me like after Blinky gave the above quote all the pro-Hamilton posters started a flame war and didn't discuss the issue at hand either. That makes it difficult to have a moral high ground in this case.

Out of curiosity, do you disagree that Lewis believes he will benefit from having data sharing banned? And if you don't, then doesn't that mean he wants to get an advantage over his teammate by having it banned? Handicap may not be quite the right word, but I have a hard time believing Lewis doesn't think he's going to come out ahead as a result of the proposed ban. I think his experience with Rosberg being able to get closer to him through studying his data is fresh in his mind and he doesn't want it to happen again.

And that's entirely reasonable! I wouldn't either. But it goes against the narrative being pushed by Hamilton fans here that Lewis is thinking purely altruistically for the good of the sport, and not trying to gain an advantage for himself. He's an F1 driver: of course he's trying to gain an advantage for himself.

sandman1347 wrote:
Your use of the red herring that Lewis learned from Alonso in 2007 is also a bit off-putting. Both Lewis and Alonso learned from each other's data that year as has been documented numerous times.

I've certainly seen the claim made numerous times - I'm not so sure anyone has ever produced documentation of it. But even if it is true, I still think my point stands that Lewis clearly benefited from data sharing to become the driver he is today, while he wants to keep others from being able to reap the same benefit.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 3:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4068
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Anyway you are not discussing what he actually suggested. You are still responding to the click-bait-style headline which was designed to get people gossiping about Lewis (a goal it clearly managed to achieve).

I'll respond to this first: my very first post in this thread discusses exactly what Hamilton suggested, and shows my opinion of it:

Exediron wrote:
In the abstract, I agree with Hamilton; drivers should succeed or fail based on their skill, not their ability to mimic each other. Realistically however, there's no way to put the genii back in the bottle, and there's also no question that data sharing leads to better drivers. From a team perspective - and Hamilton often seems to lose sight of the fact that F1 is ultimately a team sport - having both drivers sharing data and improving is a no-brainer.

With that out of the way, on to the rest.

sandman1347 wrote:
So I have to stop you here. To suggest that you you don't think he was saying that Lewis wanted preferential treatment when his exact words were, "Why does Hamilton fear Bottas? Why is he already campaigning to handicap the Finn?" is a bit disingenuous don't you think? How else could that be interpreted?

That comment was what started the initial disagreement in this thread and yes, people DID support him on that (just look at the first page).

Okay, I admit that the language of Blinky's post was not very neutral. However, aside from that specific line, the rest of it is discussing the general implications of banning data sharing and how that hurts the team. I have looked over the first page, and it looks to me like after Blinky gave the above quote all the pro-Hamilton posters started a flame war and didn't discuss the issue at hand either. That makes it difficult to have a moral high ground in this case.

Out of curiosity, do you disagree that Lewis believes he will benefit from having data sharing banned? And if you don't, then doesn't that mean he wants to get an advantage over his teammate by having it banned? Handicap may not be quite the right word, but I have a hard time believing Lewis doesn't think he's going to come out ahead as a result of the proposed ban. I think his experience with Rosberg being able to get closer to him through studying his data is fresh in his mind and he doesn't want it to happen again.

And that's entirely reasonable! I wouldn't either. But it goes against the narrative being pushed by Hamilton fans here that Lewis is thinking purely altruistically for the good of the sport, and not trying to gain an advantage for himself. He's an F1 driver: of course he's trying to gain an advantage for himself.

sandman1347 wrote:
Your use of the red herring that Lewis learned from Alonso in 2007 is also a bit off-putting. Both Lewis and Alonso learned from each other's data that year as has been documented numerous times.

I've certainly seen the claim made numerous times - I'm not so sure anyone has ever produced documentation of it. But even if it is true, I still think my point stands that Lewis clearly benefited from data sharing to become the driver he is today, while he wants to keep others from being able to reap the same benefit.

There seems to be some very slanted thinking here. In point of fact, the removal of the ability of drivers to share data does not benefit any driver. It actually removes the benefit of the shared data from all drivers. I do think that Lewis believes that he would thrive in that environment but it is NOT seeking an advantage. It is actually seeking to remove any advantage that someone might gain by looking at another driver's data. To spin that as him seeking an advantage is going too far. He feels that he is disadvantaged by the current situation; where he can find the limit on track and his teammate can simply copy him.

This same thinking speaks to your comment about his time with Alonso as his teammate. You are talking about Bottas as if he is in Hamilton's position from 2007. Bottas is actually older than Alonso was in 2007 and is entering his 5th season. He's not a rookie or a beginner. He is a seasoned veteran at this stage with almost 80 races under his belt. He is not in a position where he should have an expectation that his teammate is going to help him. Hamilton was a rookie in 2007 and, as has been pointed out, the data was shared both ways. Basically, both of them benefited from sharing data. Certainly there were tracks where one or the other had the upper hand but neither was dominant over the other.

The main thing is that if there was no data sharing, which there wasn't after a while, then the benefit would be removed from both drivers. It wouldn't be unfair to either of them. The only way to make it unfair would be to deny one driver access to data while allowing it for the other.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4272
Location: Michigan, USA
sandman1347 wrote:
There seems to be some very slanted thinking here. In point of fact, the removal of the ability of drivers to share data does not benefit any driver. It actually removes the benefit of the shared data from all drivers. I do think that Lewis believes that he would thrive in that environment but it is NOT seeking an advantage. It is actually seeking to remove any advantage that someone might gain by looking at another driver's data. To spin that as him seeking an advantage is going too far. He feels that he is disadvantaged by the current situation; where he can find the limit on track and his teammate can simply copy him.

I don't agree with that reasoning - removing the ability to share data clearly benefits the better driver. If driver A is faster through the corners than driver B, driver A stands to gain nothing by looking at driver B's data - but driver B stands to gain a great deal.

You can say that Lewis feels he is disadvantaged by the current situation, and that's an equally appropriate way of putting it. But taking away a disadvantage has the same effect as gaining an advantage: it boils down to the same thing. Lewis believes removing data sharing will be good for him competitively. It seems we actually agree on that point and you just don't like the way I've been putting it?

I honestly see no difference between seeking to remove an advantage that someone else has over you and seeking to give yourself an advantage. Teammate battles are a zero sum game, and anything you take away from the other driver is a gain for you.

sandman1347 wrote:
This same thinking speaks to your comment about his time with Alonso as his teammate. You are talking about Bottas as if he is in Hamilton's position from 2007. Bottas is actually older than Alonso was in 2007 and is entering his 5th season. He's not a rookie or a beginner. He is a seasoned veteran at this stage with almost 80 races under his belt. He is not in a position where he should have an expectation that his teammate is going to help him. Hamilton was a rookie in 2007 and, as has been pointed out, the data was shared both ways. Basically, both of them benefited from sharing data. Certainly there were tracks where one or the other had the upper hand but neither was dominant over the other.

Why should a rookie get any special consideration?

Going by the same principle on which banning data sharing is ever a good thing, the better rookies will show their ability by not needing their teammates' data. It also would give an artificial advantage to rookies with strong teammates: let's say for example Stroll partners Massa in his first year, then in his second year partners Alonso. He got to look at the data of a vastly weaker driver when he was a rookie, and now arbitrarily gets nothing from his stronger teammate later. Vandoorne on the other hand is getting to learn from the data one of the best drivers on the grid because he's a rookie, and will have a leg up as a result.

sandman1347 wrote:
The main thing is that if there was no data sharing, which there wasn't after a while, then the benefit would be removed from both drivers. It wouldn't be unfair to either of them. The only way to make it unfair would be to deny one driver access to data while allowing it for the other.

Eventually it would indeed equal out with regard to the drivers. But it would always be a disadvantage to the teams, which is my main argument against it - and also the reason it will never happen.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5742
Location: Nebraska, USA
This is getting asinine....

seven pages and it is all caused by that "dastardly" Blinkey asking why Lewis is trying to handicap Bottas... Aw, Blinkey, shame on you!
;)

Several responses, including one or two of my own, were made based on the initial postings without reading the whole interview, but after that was revealed, the tone changed for a bit. However, there is still cause for questioning Lewis when it comes to his desire to keep info from his teammate, regardless of the nature of it. If the team cares to share information between the drivers that is the team's business, not that of either driver. Some of us feel that way, and like it or not, it is a legitimate belief backed up by who pays the bills and writes the paychecks.

Just because some of us have questioned Lewis' intent, it is not necessarily a case of "hatred" of Hamilton, or even dislike... so why take it so personal whenever Lewis is questioned?

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 6:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20570
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
kleefton wrote:
No it is not.

Has bottas said that lewis is forbidding him to see his data? Has anyone on the team said that? Do you think lewis is dumb enough that he thinks he can stop data sharing at mercedes?

You are just distorting a common lewis slip of a tongue comment that shouldnt been taken literally. Its obvious what he meant by that.

Yes it is. I can do this all day.

No-one's distorting anything, since they are Lewis' own words, but it is telling that there are those who are trying to blow it up out of proportion and make out it's some kind of attack on him. Why you feel the need to jump up and defend him at even the vaguest slight only you can answer, I suppose.

How can it be a slip of the tongue when he specifically said he was going to ask Mercedes to stop sharing data? And why is that a position that needs defending by attacking the poster who reports it? Take it as it is, a discussion point, and stop trying to turn it into a battleground.

The ones blowing things out of proportion are you and others who tripped over themselves to suggest that he was seeking preferential treatment (a completely nonsensical notion). Especially considering the fact that Lewis specifically said he meant as an idea for all of F1 and not as something he wanted just for himself and his team.

It's not the first time you've accused me of something that isn't true. It would be nice if you wouldn't just throw out blanket accusations. To save you the research, I've not said he's looking for preferential treatment. Which makes the above a strawman.

That aside, this conversation started when the OP was attacked for "having an agenda," when all he did was share a link and highlight where Lewis stated that he would ask the team not to share data with his team mate. I don't see why people think the OP deserves an attack for this and it seems a bit of a hysterical over-reaction to me. Disagree by all means, but why the ad-hominem attacks?

What ad-hominem attack? Are you saying that Blinky didn't accuse him of seeking preferential treatment? Because he blatantly did in the very first response to the OP. No one is attacking you. Instead of playing the victim why don't you actually just be honest for once?

At the end of the day, if almost anyone else had made the comment, we would discuss the merits of the idea. Would drivers not sharing data be good for the sport? Would it improve the show? Is it even doable? How would you police it? etc. Because the quote comes from Lewis Hamilton though, we are not discussing the idea, we are discussing Lewis Hamilton. THAT is an ad-hominem attack and it is just unfortunate that this is not a one-off thing but a pattern in this forum.

well, last time I checked Blinky wasn't the OP and these latest accusations, which you're so keen to jump on, have been about the OP. Secondly, in the post above you wrote "you and others," but clearly you have no idea what I actually posted but just thought to tar everyone with the same brush. If the question is about honesty, then perhaps you could be honest about the fact that you're completely ignoring the fact this discussion was about the OP and just using it as a launchpad to attack anyone who you don't feel is pro-Hamilton? Alternatively, you could just realise your mistake and acknowledge you may have been a bit hasty, but I don't see that happening.

Many of the posts did discuss the merits of the idea. The main reason people are discussing Hamilton is largely because of a select few Hamilton supporters, yourself included, who can't seem to let go of the idea that it's their job to defend him from anyone who's less than complimentary. If you're honest, you'll acknowledge that


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 6:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20570
sandman1347 wrote:
mds wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Especially considering the fact that Lewis specifically said he meant as an idea for all of F1 and not as something he wanted just for himself and his team.


So then what was "I've asked my team..." supposed to mean?

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/187 ... od-f1-fans

It's easy to get lost in cherry-picked excerpts. Why don't you read what he actually said when asked to explain his thoughts on it and then draw a conclusion.

When asked at the launch of Mercedes' 2017 challenger whether that meant he just wanted the team's data to be focused on his own performance, he said: "No, that's not my point. What I referred to is that it's cool for the engineers and the team to use it to continue to move forward - that's very important for us - and for them to share the information of the car engineering wise to advance the performance of the car. That's very important."

"What I refer to is me as an individual. My job when I arrive at the track is to be the best, get out there and exploit the car in the best way I can and I feel. But the way that the sport is now, whoever your teammate is you get to see their data and compare your data to it and you see if there are improvements to someone else's driving style you can adapt to it."

"I just feel that to make it harder for us drivers, they should remove that so we have to rely on our own data and compare your own laps to your own laps, and before you go out there you decide to try a different line in the corner - it may or may not work. There are going to be weekends when you get it right and there are going to be weekends when you just don't know where the time is, but you can't find out and the other guy does [know]."

"I think that just makes it more of a challenge for a driver, and ultimately I think the better driver the more he will be able to get there faster or find something new faster than the others. That's really my point.
"

I don't think you are being fair, here. The quote you've provided happened after the one from the OP, when he was asked to explain himself (which obviously means it's not just P-F1 forum members who interpreted it differently to you). So no-one's cherry-picking quotes, just commenting on what was actually said in the OP.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 6:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20570
Invade wrote:
mds wrote:
Invade wrote:
bonecrasher wrote:
Invade wrote:
This has nothing to with Hamilton vs Bottas. The thread is titled incorrectly and is pure click bait. It's about the whole field not sharing data in some capacity and not about Hamilton not just wanting Bottas to see his data, or himself to see Bottas'.

The OP had an agenda that's obvious to see!


It colours the thread for sure. Lewis is talking about the sport in general talking through his own prism of his own team, because that's what he knows.

It then becomes (just) a Lewis-Bottas thing, which is myopic. It's a holistic Formula 1 thing.


So then what was "I've asked my team..." supposed to mean?


It means what it says. Obviously, Hamilton hasn't personally gone to other teams asking them to also stop sharing data, so the way he puts it would be detrimental to Mercedes as a whole assuming other teams continue to share data. None of this is being denied though (at least from me). All I really said earlier is that he's making a wider point and so it's not JUST ( - important qualifier which I forgot to use earlier because I assumed what I was getting at would be clear) ... just.. a Hamilton-Bottas thing. Lewis was explaining his own point of view from the prism of his own team. However, the way the thread was presented shone a light on the specific dynamic which preponderated over the wider point of discussion that Hamilton was really trying to bring up, albeit not in the clearest way given your reminder. Then we can sit back and see what direction people want to swing for.

I just don't think Lewis' idea can be successfully policed.

(BTW for the record people should know that I'm not really criticising the thread creator per se as it's up to people how to take what's presented and the OP did a great job in presenting a topic and offering source material, I'm just pointing out how I personally see the thread and the direction that the thread is likely to take the discussion in. Really like the OP in general for his posting and contributions on the forum - like him a lot. I'm a big fan of many "clickbait threads" and make them myself -- of course we might disagree on whether it's clickbait or not ;))

I don't really agree. It was a general point right up to the moment that he said he'd be asking the team to stop sharing data, at which point it became a much more specific one. Given how much data sharing had been in the headlines in recent years, particularly in regard to the Mercedes drivers, it's not unreasonable to assume that he feels Rosberg may have gained an advantage there and he doesn't want the same thing to happen with Bottas.

For some reason, people seem to think that acknowledging that portrays Lewis in a negative light in some way, hence your clickbait comments. But it's a legitimate point of discussion and I don't see why personal attacks need to come into it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 7:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10591
sandman1347 wrote:
mds wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Especially considering the fact that Lewis specifically said he meant as an idea for all of F1 and not as something he wanted just for himself and his team.


So then what was "I've asked my team..." supposed to mean?

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/187 ... od-f1-fans

It's easy to get lost in cherry-picked excerpts. Why don't you read what he actually said when asked to explain his thoughts on it and then draw a conclusion.


I actually listened to the whole damn thing, so please don't tell me I'm cherry picking. I heard something in that interview that made me think the thread title is correct, and not just because he meant it in a broader context but also because on a personal level he feels the same should happen within his team.

_________________
Supporting all drivers with surnames starting with "V".

Proud member of the "It's Toro Rosso, not Torro Rosso" action committee.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 1:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4068
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Yes it is. I can do this all day.

No-one's distorting anything, since they are Lewis' own words, but it is telling that there are those who are trying to blow it up out of proportion and make out it's some kind of attack on him. Why you feel the need to jump up and defend him at even the vaguest slight only you can answer, I suppose.

How can it be a slip of the tongue when he specifically said he was going to ask Mercedes to stop sharing data? And why is that a position that needs defending by attacking the poster who reports it? Take it as it is, a discussion point, and stop trying to turn it into a battleground.

The ones blowing things out of proportion are you and others who tripped over themselves to suggest that he was seeking preferential treatment (a completely nonsensical notion). Especially considering the fact that Lewis specifically said he meant as an idea for all of F1 and not as something he wanted just for himself and his team.

It's not the first time you've accused me of something that isn't true. It would be nice if you wouldn't just throw out blanket accusations. To save you the research, I've not said he's looking for preferential treatment. Which makes the above a strawman.

That aside, this conversation started when the OP was attacked for "having an agenda," when all he did was share a link and highlight where Lewis stated that he would ask the team not to share data with his team mate. I don't see why people think the OP deserves an attack for this and it seems a bit of a hysterical over-reaction to me. Disagree by all means, but why the ad-hominem attacks?

What ad-hominem attack? Are you saying that Blinky didn't accuse him of seeking preferential treatment? Because he blatantly did in the very first response to the OP. No one is attacking you. Instead of playing the victim why don't you actually just be honest for once?

At the end of the day, if almost anyone else had made the comment, we would discuss the merits of the idea. Would drivers not sharing data be good for the sport? Would it improve the show? Is it even doable? How would you police it? etc. Because the quote comes from Lewis Hamilton though, we are not discussing the idea, we are discussing Lewis Hamilton. THAT is an ad-hominem attack and it is just unfortunate that this is not a one-off thing but a pattern in this forum.

well, last time I checked Blinky wasn't the OP and these latest accusations, which you're so keen to jump on, have been about the OP. Secondly, in the post above you wrote "you and others," but clearly you have no idea what I actually posted but just thought to tar everyone with the same brush. If the question is about honesty, then perhaps you could be honest about the fact that you're completely ignoring the fact this discussion was about the OP and just using it as a launchpad to attack anyone who you don't feel is pro-Hamilton? Alternatively, you could just realise your mistake and acknowledge you may have been a bit hasty, but I don't see that happening.

Many of the posts did discuss the merits of the idea. The main reason people are discussing Hamilton is largely because of a select few Hamilton supporters, yourself included, who can't seem to let go of the idea that it's their job to defend him from anyone who's less than complimentary. If you're honest, you'll acknowledge that

Here we go again with you claiming that I'm attacking someone. Who have I attacked? What have I said in here that is pro-Hamilton in any way? Unfortunately, you don't seem to be able to have a rational conversation without ascribing actions and words to the other party that they never did/said. The reason you do this is because you know that everything that I've stated is purely based in fact, while your arguments are based in personal bias. As such you need to drag me down to that level before an argument becomes possible.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 1:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4068
mds wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mds wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Especially considering the fact that Lewis specifically said he meant as an idea for all of F1 and not as something he wanted just for himself and his team.


So then what was "I've asked my team..." supposed to mean?

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/187 ... od-f1-fans

It's easy to get lost in cherry-picked excerpts. Why don't you read what he actually said when asked to explain his thoughts on it and then draw a conclusion.


I actually listened to the whole damn thing, so please don't tell me I'm cherry picking. I heard something in that interview that made me think the thread title is correct, and not just because he meant it in a broader context but also because on a personal level he feels the same should happen within his team.

The quote of mine that you initially responded to is one where I said that he was making a suggestion about how he feels things should be done for all teams/drivers and not just for Mercedes. Do you dispute that? Because it seems from your post that you are acknowledging that it's true.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 1:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 1019
Blake wrote:
This is getting asinine....

seven pages and it is all caused by that "dastardly" Blinkey asking why Lewis is trying to handicap Bottas... Aw, Blinkey, shame on you!
;)

Several responses, including one or two of my own, were made based on the initial postings without reading the whole interview, but after that was revealed, the tone changed for a bit. However, there is still cause for questioning Lewis when it comes to his desire to keep info from his teammate, regardless of the nature of it. If the team cares to share information between the drivers that is the team's business, not that of either driver. Some of us feel that way, and like it or not, it is a legitimate belief backed up by who pays the bills and writes the paychecks.

Just because some of us have questioned Lewis' intent, it is not necessarily a case of "hatred" of Hamilton, or even dislike... so why take it so personal whenever Lewis is questioned?


Aww, I hang my head in disingenuous shame.

Did I call Mr Hamilton any nasty names or imply he was lacking in moral fiber? No, but I did pose a question some may have wondered about. For those rushing to Hamilton's defense, there were far too many personal attacks directed towards me instead of actually answering a very simple question. Or is it that some could not come up with an answer?

It is not my mission to attack anyone based on the simple fact I am rarely in this forum. Trust me, if that was on my agenda I would make multiple posts each day and launch a fusillade of attacks. But I do have an agenda, to question what many take for granted and just regurgitate what some pundit spouts off on. I desire to stimulate thought, and attempt to sway people into accepting more than a specific news source in Formula One.

Please people, there are many decent racing news sites. Check them out, read different perspectives, think for yourself, reach your own conclusions.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 1:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10591
sandman1347 wrote:
mds wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mds wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Especially considering the fact that Lewis specifically said he meant as an idea for all of F1 and not as something he wanted just for himself and his team.


So then what was "I've asked my team..." supposed to mean?

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/187 ... od-f1-fans

It's easy to get lost in cherry-picked excerpts. Why don't you read what he actually said when asked to explain his thoughts on it and then draw a conclusion.


I actually listened to the whole damn thing, so please don't tell me I'm cherry picking. I heard something in that interview that made me think the thread title is correct, and not just because he meant it in a broader context but also because on a personal level he feels the same should happen within his team.

The quote of mine that you initially responded to is one where I said that he was making a suggestion about how he feels things should be done for all teams/drivers and not just for Mercedes. Do you dispute that? Because it seems from your post that you are acknowledging that it's true.


The thing is that some are saying the thread title is incorrect as he only meant it as some possible improvement or change for F1 itself instead and so that he wasn't specifically saying that he doesn't want to share data with Bottas.

I agree that it's an idea he holds about improving F1 itself.
I kind of disagree that he wasn't also talking specifically about his current situation within Mercedes. That's where the "I have asked my team" comes in, as I have no other plausible explanation for that.

Hope this is a good reflection of my thoughts on the matter :)

_________________
Supporting all drivers with surnames starting with "V".

Proud member of the "It's Toro Rosso, not Torro Rosso" action committee.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 3:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20570
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
The ones blowing things out of proportion are you and others who tripped over themselves to suggest that he was seeking preferential treatment (a completely nonsensical notion). Especially considering the fact that Lewis specifically said he meant as an idea for all of F1 and not as something he wanted just for himself and his team.

It's not the first time you've accused me of something that isn't true. It would be nice if you wouldn't just throw out blanket accusations. To save you the research, I've not said he's looking for preferential treatment. Which makes the above a strawman.

That aside, this conversation started when the OP was attacked for "having an agenda," when all he did was share a link and highlight where Lewis stated that he would ask the team not to share data with his team mate. I don't see why people think the OP deserves an attack for this and it seems a bit of a hysterical over-reaction to me. Disagree by all means, but why the ad-hominem attacks?

What ad-hominem attack? Are you saying that Blinky didn't accuse him of seeking preferential treatment? Because he blatantly did in the very first response to the OP. No one is attacking you. Instead of playing the victim why don't you actually just be honest for once?

At the end of the day, if almost anyone else had made the comment, we would discuss the merits of the idea. Would drivers not sharing data be good for the sport? Would it improve the show? Is it even doable? How would you police it? etc. Because the quote comes from Lewis Hamilton though, we are not discussing the idea, we are discussing Lewis Hamilton. THAT is an ad-hominem attack and it is just unfortunate that this is not a one-off thing but a pattern in this forum.

well, last time I checked Blinky wasn't the OP and these latest accusations, which you're so keen to jump on, have been about the OP. Secondly, in the post above you wrote "you and others," but clearly you have no idea what I actually posted but just thought to tar everyone with the same brush. If the question is about honesty, then perhaps you could be honest about the fact that you're completely ignoring the fact this discussion was about the OP and just using it as a launchpad to attack anyone who you don't feel is pro-Hamilton? Alternatively, you could just realise your mistake and acknowledge you may have been a bit hasty, but I don't see that happening.

Many of the posts did discuss the merits of the idea. The main reason people are discussing Hamilton is largely because of a select few Hamilton supporters, yourself included, who can't seem to let go of the idea that it's their job to defend him from anyone who's less than complimentary. If you're honest, you'll acknowledge that

Here we go again with you claiming that I'm attacking someone. Who have I attacked? What have I said in here that is pro-Hamilton in any way? Unfortunately, you don't seem to be able to have a rational conversation without ascribing actions and words to the other party that they never did/said. The reason you do this is because you know that everything that I've stated is purely based in fact, while your arguments are based in personal bias. As such you need to drag me down to that level before an argument becomes possible.

The first attack was on the OP, which was what I originally responded to. If you can't or won't see that I can't help, I'm afraid.

Then you jumped in and accused me of claiming Hamilton was seeking preferential treatment, when I did nothing of the sort. I note you seem to be ignoring this salient point and I wonder where it fits with your idea that everything you've stated is purely based in fact?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 3:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4068
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
It's not the first time you've accused me of something that isn't true. It would be nice if you wouldn't just throw out blanket accusations. To save you the research, I've not said he's looking for preferential treatment. Which makes the above a strawman.

That aside, this conversation started when the OP was attacked for "having an agenda," when all he did was share a link and highlight where Lewis stated that he would ask the team not to share data with his team mate. I don't see why people think the OP deserves an attack for this and it seems a bit of a hysterical over-reaction to me. Disagree by all means, but why the ad-hominem attacks?

What ad-hominem attack? Are you saying that Blinky didn't accuse him of seeking preferential treatment? Because he blatantly did in the very first response to the OP. No one is attacking you. Instead of playing the victim why don't you actually just be honest for once?

At the end of the day, if almost anyone else had made the comment, we would discuss the merits of the idea. Would drivers not sharing data be good for the sport? Would it improve the show? Is it even doable? How would you police it? etc. Because the quote comes from Lewis Hamilton though, we are not discussing the idea, we are discussing Lewis Hamilton. THAT is an ad-hominem attack and it is just unfortunate that this is not a one-off thing but a pattern in this forum.

well, last time I checked Blinky wasn't the OP and these latest accusations, which you're so keen to jump on, have been about the OP. Secondly, in the post above you wrote "you and others," but clearly you have no idea what I actually posted but just thought to tar everyone with the same brush. If the question is about honesty, then perhaps you could be honest about the fact that you're completely ignoring the fact this discussion was about the OP and just using it as a launchpad to attack anyone who you don't feel is pro-Hamilton? Alternatively, you could just realise your mistake and acknowledge you may have been a bit hasty, but I don't see that happening.

Many of the posts did discuss the merits of the idea. The main reason people are discussing Hamilton is largely because of a select few Hamilton supporters, yourself included, who can't seem to let go of the idea that it's their job to defend him from anyone who's less than complimentary. If you're honest, you'll acknowledge that

Here we go again with you claiming that I'm attacking someone. Who have I attacked? What have I said in here that is pro-Hamilton in any way? Unfortunately, you don't seem to be able to have a rational conversation without ascribing actions and words to the other party that they never did/said. The reason you do this is because you know that everything that I've stated is purely based in fact, while your arguments are based in personal bias. As such you need to drag me down to that level before an argument becomes possible.

The first attack was on the OP, which was what I originally responded to. If you can't or won't see that I can't help, I'm afraid.

Then you jumped in and accused me of claiming Hamilton was seeking preferential treatment, when I did nothing of the sort. I note you seem to be ignoring this salient point and I wonder where it fits with your idea that everything you've stated is purely based in fact?

It would be a salient point if I had accused you of that. I never accused you of saying that, I said that Blinky's post said that. I've said that pretty clearly. Your posts, if I recall correctly, were something along the lines of "Hamilton is trying to do something that is not in the team's best interests"; which, again, fundamentally ignores what he was actually saying in order to make an ad-hominem criticism.

As has been pointed out, going back to the first page of the thread, this was initially his response to someone asking how he would improve F1 if he could. He actually covered a whole bunch of different stuff, from the cars to the tracks and regulations but, predictably, the data-sharing comment was cherry-picked and taken out of context in order to get people talking.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20570
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
What ad-hominem attack? Are you saying that Blinky didn't accuse him of seeking preferential treatment? Because he blatantly did in the very first response to the OP. No one is attacking you. Instead of playing the victim why don't you actually just be honest for once?

At the end of the day, if almost anyone else had made the comment, we would discuss the merits of the idea. Would drivers not sharing data be good for the sport? Would it improve the show? Is it even doable? How would you police it? etc. Because the quote comes from Lewis Hamilton though, we are not discussing the idea, we are discussing Lewis Hamilton. THAT is an ad-hominem attack and it is just unfortunate that this is not a one-off thing but a pattern in this forum.

well, last time I checked Blinky wasn't the OP and these latest accusations, which you're so keen to jump on, have been about the OP. Secondly, in the post above you wrote "you and others," but clearly you have no idea what I actually posted but just thought to tar everyone with the same brush. If the question is about honesty, then perhaps you could be honest about the fact that you're completely ignoring the fact this discussion was about the OP and just using it as a launchpad to attack anyone who you don't feel is pro-Hamilton? Alternatively, you could just realise your mistake and acknowledge you may have been a bit hasty, but I don't see that happening.

Many of the posts did discuss the merits of the idea. The main reason people are discussing Hamilton is largely because of a select few Hamilton supporters, yourself included, who can't seem to let go of the idea that it's their job to defend him from anyone who's less than complimentary. If you're honest, you'll acknowledge that

Here we go again with you claiming that I'm attacking someone. Who have I attacked? What have I said in here that is pro-Hamilton in any way? Unfortunately, you don't seem to be able to have a rational conversation without ascribing actions and words to the other party that they never did/said. The reason you do this is because you know that everything that I've stated is purely based in fact, while your arguments are based in personal bias. As such you need to drag me down to that level before an argument becomes possible.

The first attack was on the OP, which was what I originally responded to. If you can't or won't see that I can't help, I'm afraid.

Then you jumped in and accused me of claiming Hamilton was seeking preferential treatment, when I did nothing of the sort. I note you seem to be ignoring this salient point and I wonder where it fits with your idea that everything you've stated is purely based in fact?

It would be a salient point if I had accused you of that. I never accused you of saying that, I said that Blinky's post said that. I've said that pretty clearly. Your posts, if I recall correctly, were something along the lines of "Hamilton is trying to do something that is not in the team's best interests"; which, again, fundamentally ignores what he was actually saying in order to make an ad-hominem criticism.

As has been pointed out, going back to the first page of the thread, this was initially his response to someone asking how he would improve F1 if he could. He actually covered a whole bunch of different stuff, from the cars to the tracks and regulations but, predictably, the data-sharing comment was cherry-picked and taken out of context in order to get people talking.

So this:

The ones blowing things out of proportion are you and others who tripped over themselves to suggest that he was seeking preferential treatment

doesn't actually include me, then?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4068
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
well, last time I checked Blinky wasn't the OP and these latest accusations, which you're so keen to jump on, have been about the OP. Secondly, in the post above you wrote "you and others," but clearly you have no idea what I actually posted but just thought to tar everyone with the same brush. If the question is about honesty, then perhaps you could be honest about the fact that you're completely ignoring the fact this discussion was about the OP and just using it as a launchpad to attack anyone who you don't feel is pro-Hamilton? Alternatively, you could just realise your mistake and acknowledge you may have been a bit hasty, but I don't see that happening.

Many of the posts did discuss the merits of the idea. The main reason people are discussing Hamilton is largely because of a select few Hamilton supporters, yourself included, who can't seem to let go of the idea that it's their job to defend him from anyone who's less than complimentary. If you're honest, you'll acknowledge that

Here we go again with you claiming that I'm attacking someone. Who have I attacked? What have I said in here that is pro-Hamilton in any way? Unfortunately, you don't seem to be able to have a rational conversation without ascribing actions and words to the other party that they never did/said. The reason you do this is because you know that everything that I've stated is purely based in fact, while your arguments are based in personal bias. As such you need to drag me down to that level before an argument becomes possible.

The first attack was on the OP, which was what I originally responded to. If you can't or won't see that I can't help, I'm afraid.

Then you jumped in and accused me of claiming Hamilton was seeking preferential treatment, when I did nothing of the sort. I note you seem to be ignoring this salient point and I wonder where it fits with your idea that everything you've stated is purely based in fact?

It would be a salient point if I had accused you of that. I never accused you of saying that, I said that Blinky's post said that. I've said that pretty clearly. Your posts, if I recall correctly, were something along the lines of "Hamilton is trying to do something that is not in the team's best interests"; which, again, fundamentally ignores what he was actually saying in order to make an ad-hominem criticism.

As has been pointed out, going back to the first page of the thread, this was initially his response to someone asking how he would improve F1 if he could. He actually covered a whole bunch of different stuff, from the cars to the tracks and regulations but, predictably, the data-sharing comment was cherry-picked and taken out of context in order to get people talking.

So this:

The ones blowing things out of proportion are you and others who tripped over themselves to suggest that he was seeking preferential treatment

doesn't actually include me, then?

Okay, so to clarify, had I wanted to include you as responsible for that accusation, I would have used the word, "yourselves" instead of "themselves". I chose the words that I used specifically not to include you as responsible for making that accusation. Hope that clears up any confusion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm
Posts: 2211
slide wrote:
i agree the each driver should work it out for himself


But it's a team sport at the end of the day. Having access to each other's data may make both drivers faster vs the other teams.

_________________
Shoot999: "And anyone who puts a Y on the end of his name as a nickname should be punched in the face repeatedly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 8:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4272
Location: Michigan, USA
sandman1347 wrote:
Your posts [Zoue] if I recall correctly, were something along the lines of "Hamilton is trying to do something that is not in the team's best interests"; which, again, fundamentally ignores what he was actually saying in order to make an ad-hominem criticism.

That's bizarre. I'm sorry, but you really need to step back and realize that at this point you've gone so far in defending Hamilton that you're not making sense anymore.

There is absolutely no question that banning data sharing will hurt teams; data sharing makes both drivers faster, as you have admitted earlier in this thread. Making both drivers faster is in the team's best interests; reducing the competiveness of one or both is not in the team's best interests.

Additionally, it's not even an ad hominem attack.

Quote:
adverb: ad hominem; adjective: ad hominem

1.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

That is what ad hominem actually means. Arguing that Lewis' suggestion is not in the best interest of the teams is definitely not an ad hominem attack - it is directed at the position he is maintaining, and is completely neutral to the person making it. An ad hominem attack would be directed at Lewis himself, not his point: for example, saying Lewis is dishonest so you can't trust the motives behind his idea. That's an ad hominem attack, because it ignores his point and focuses on the individual.

You need to realize that there are a lot of people in this thread who know exactly what Lewis is suggesting and simply do not agree with it. Not because we hate Lewis, but because we see F1 differently than he does. We see F1 as a team sport, and do not support an idea which fundamentally places the driver above the team. Even Lewis himself admitted that would be the effect in the car launch interview.

Quote:
When asked at the launch of Mercedes' 2017 challenger whether that meant he just wanted the team's data to be focused on his own performance, he said: "No, that's not my point. What I referred to is that it's cool for the engineers and the team to use it to continue to move forward - that's very important for us - and for them to share the information of the car engineering wise to advance the performance of the car. That's very important."

"What I refer to is me as an individual. My job when I arrive at the track is to be the best, get out there and exploit the car in the best way I can and I feel. But the way that the sport is now, whoever your teammate is you get to see their data and compare your data to it and you see if there are improvements to someone else's driving style you can adapt to it."

This quote - which you provided, from Lewis himself - makes it crystal clear that he knows banning data sharing would not be good for the team. He made the suggestion from his point of view as a driver, and it is in the best interest of the driver, not the team. Denying that is just denying reality.

It's not a slur on Lewis, or a personal attack, to say his idea isn't in the best interest of the teams. It's just an objective fact. You can still agree with it accepting that fact, but denying the fact itself just makes this whole debate descend into absurdity.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 10:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4068
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Your posts [Zoue] if I recall correctly, were something along the lines of "Hamilton is trying to do something that is not in the team's best interests"; which, again, fundamentally ignores what he was actually saying in order to make an ad-hominem criticism.

That's bizarre. I'm sorry, but you really need to step back and realize that at this point you've gone so far in defending Hamilton that you're not making sense anymore.

There is absolutely no question that banning data sharing will hurt teams; data sharing makes both drivers faster, as you have admitted earlier in this thread. Making both drivers faster is in the team's best interests; reducing the competiveness of one or both is not in the team's best interests.

Additionally, it's not even an ad hominem attack.

Quote:
adverb: ad hominem; adjective: ad hominem

1.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

That is what ad hominem actually means. Arguing that Lewis' suggestion is not in the best interest of the teams is definitely not an ad hominem attack - it is directed at the position he is maintaining, and is completely neutral to the person making it. An ad hominem attack would be directed at Lewis himself, not his point: for example, saying Lewis is dishonest so you can't trust the motives behind his idea. That's an ad hominem attack, because it ignores his point and focuses on the individual.

You need to realize that there are a lot of people in this thread who know exactly what Lewis is suggesting and simply do not agree with it. Not because we hate Lewis, but because we see F1 differently than he does. We see F1 as a team sport, and do not support an idea which fundamentally places the driver above the team. Even Lewis himself admitted that would be the effect in the car launch interview.

Quote:
When asked at the launch of Mercedes' 2017 challenger whether that meant he just wanted the team's data to be focused on his own performance, he said: "No, that's not my point. What I referred to is that it's cool for the engineers and the team to use it to continue to move forward - that's very important for us - and for them to share the information of the car engineering wise to advance the performance of the car. That's very important."

"What I refer to is me as an individual. My job when I arrive at the track is to be the best, get out there and exploit the car in the best way I can and I feel. But the way that the sport is now, whoever your teammate is you get to see their data and compare your data to it and you see if there are improvements to someone else's driving style you can adapt to it."

This quote - which you provided, from Lewis himself - makes it crystal clear that he knows banning data sharing would not be good for the team. He made the suggestion from his point of view as a driver, and it is in the best interest of the driver, not the team. Denying that is just denying reality.

It's not a slur on Lewis, or a personal attack, to say his idea isn't in the best interest of the teams. It's just an objective fact. You can still agree with it accepting that fact, but denying the fact itself just makes this whole debate descend into absurdity.

You seem to be deliberately obtuse at this point. How exactly would it not be in the best interest of the team if all teams would be playing by the same rules? Again, you and some others in here seem to adamantly refuse to actually look at what he was suggesting as a response to a question about what he would do to improve F1. He is suggesting that an F1 without data sharing between drivers would be better. How is that an attempt to do something that is not in the best interest of the team? It would only hurt the team if it were only his team that wasn't sharing data (which clearly is not what he was suggesting).

Drop the idea that I'm defending Lewis. What I'm doing is pointing out that you are discussing something that he never suggested in the first place. It is an ad-hominem attack to take a suggestion that he made for F1 and represent it as something that he selfishly wants specifically for his team in order to gain an advantage over his teammate. That is definitively an ad-hominem attack.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 11:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4272
Location: Michigan, USA
sandman1347 wrote:
You seem to be deliberately obtuse at this point. How exactly would it not be in the best interest of the team if all teams would be playing by the same rules? Again, you and some others in here seem to adamantly refuse to actually look at what he was suggesting as a response to a question about what he would do to improve F1. He is suggesting that an F1 without data sharing between drivers would be better. How is that an attempt to do something that is not in the best interest of the team? It would only hurt the team if it were only his team that wasn't sharing data (which clearly is not what he was suggesting).

I. Just. Explained. That.

Literally, that's what my last post was all about. If drivers share data, both of them improve. If there was no data sharing, every driver would become slightly worse, although particularly the ones who are less of natural talents. It's in the best interest of the teams for all the drivers to be as close to the best driver as possible; if McLaren already has Alonso, why shouldn't they get the benefit of using his data to make Vandoorne faster? Ricciardo and Verstappen have been willingly sharing data, and according to them it's helped them both.

To spell it out as clearly as I can: even if all the teams play by the same rules, banning data sharing puts more emphasis on the base ability of the driver. That in turn means that there is more difference between the best driver and an average driver, which means a team with one average driver and one top driver is at more of a disadvantage against a team with two top drivers. That, in turn, means teams have to pay more and try to get the best drivers - if they're available. But there's only a certain number of top drivers, so inevitably the majority of teams will have their driver lineup become slower on average if they're not allowed to share data between the drivers to improve the pace of the weaker one.

Now, I doubt you agree with the reasoning of what I just wrote. But it is directly, 100% relevant to what Lewis suggested. I suggest you drop this line about people misinterpreting or misrepresenting what Lewis said. I get what he said. I don't agree with it.

sandman1347 wrote:
Drop the idea that I'm defending Lewis. What I'm doing is pointing out that you are discussing something that he never suggested in the first place. It is an ad-hominem attack to take a suggestion that he made for F1 and represent it as something that he selfishly wants specifically for his team in order to gain an advantage over his teammate. That is definitively an ad-hominem attack.

You certainly seem to be defending him, but that's actually entirely irrelevant. You, however, are getting quite annoying with this claim that we're not discussing what he said. I never implied he wants it only for his team: I'd ask you to quote where I said that, but it's a waste of time since you won't be able to.

Lewis suggested that if data sharing was banned in F1, it would make the driver's natural ability a more important factor in F1 and help separate drivers by ability. Do you agree that's what he suggested? If not, could you kindly elaborate on what you believe he actually did suggest?

Some people have certainly put forth that his motive wasn't purely for the betterment of F1 and that he thinks the rule change would help him. Questioning his motive however is not an ad hominem attack by itself! Dismissing the merits of his suggestion because you question his motives would be a fallacy of relevance (not an ad hominem attack), but questioning his motives as a totally separate line of discussion is not. You don't get to decide whether we discuss the motives behind the suggestion, and it's perfectly legitimate to do so, provided it's done in a reasonable manner.

And if you're not defending Lewis, can you explain why you think even raising the possibility that he's trying to give himself an advantage amounts to a personal attack?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 11:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4068
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
You seem to be deliberately obtuse at this point. How exactly would it not be in the best interest of the team if all teams would be playing by the same rules? Again, you and some others in here seem to adamantly refuse to actually look at what he was suggesting as a response to a question about what he would do to improve F1. He is suggesting that an F1 without data sharing between drivers would be better. How is that an attempt to do something that is not in the best interest of the team? It would only hurt the team if it were only his team that wasn't sharing data (which clearly is not what he was suggesting).

I. Just. Explained. That.

Literally, that's what my last post was all about. If drivers share data, both of them improve. If there was no data sharing, every driver would become slightly worse, although particularly the ones who are less of natural talents. It's in the best interest of the teams for all the drivers to be as close to the best driver as possible; if McLaren already has Alonso, why shouldn't they get the benefit of using his data to make Vandoorne faster? Ricciardo and Verstappen have been willingly sharing data, and according to them it's helped them both.

To spell it out as clearly as I can: even if all the teams play by the same rules, banning data sharing puts more emphasis on the base ability of the driver. That in turn means that there is more difference between the best driver and an average driver, which means a team with one average driver and one top driver is at more of a disadvantage against a team with two top drivers. That, in turn, means teams have to pay more and try to get the best drivers - if they're available. But there's only a certain number of top drivers, so inevitably the majority of teams will have their driver lineup become slower on average if they're not allowed to share data between the drivers to improve the pace of the weaker one.

Now, I doubt you agree with the reasoning of what I just wrote. But it is directly, 100% relevant to what Lewis suggested. I suggest you drop this line about people misinterpreting or misrepresenting what Lewis said. I get what he said. I don't agree with it.

sandman1347 wrote:
Drop the idea that I'm defending Lewis. What I'm doing is pointing out that you are discussing something that he never suggested in the first place. It is an ad-hominem attack to take a suggestion that he made for F1 and represent it as something that he selfishly wants specifically for his team in order to gain an advantage over his teammate. That is definitively an ad-hominem attack.

You certainly seem to be defending him, but that's actually entirely irrelevant. You, however, are getting quite annoying with this claim that we're not discussing what he said. I never implied he wants it only for his team: I'd ask you to quote where I said that, but it's a waste of time since you won't be able to.

Lewis suggested that if data sharing was banned in F1, it would make the driver's natural ability a more important factor in F1 and help separate drivers by ability. Do you agree that's what he suggested? If not, could you kindly elaborate on what you believe he actually did suggest?

Some people have certainly put forth that his motive wasn't purely for the betterment of F1 and that he thinks the rule change would help him. Questioning his motive however is not an ad hominem attack by itself! Dismissing the merits of his suggestion because you question his motives would be a fallacy of relevance (not an ad hominem attack), but questioning his motives as a totally separate line of discussion is not. You don't get to decide whether we discuss the motives behind the suggestion, and it's perfectly legitimate to do so, provided it's done in a reasonable manner.

And if you're not defending Lewis, can you explain why you think even raising the possibility that he's trying to give himself an advantage amounts to a personal attack?

I think you're ignoring context completely. Again, the question he was asked was what ideas did he have to improve F1. Having drivers fend for themselves was just one of several. And so in this context, it's hard to see this as him seeking an advantage over his teammate.

Anyway, I don't want to argue about this anymore, so I'm gonna just drop it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4272
Location: Michigan, USA
sandman1347 wrote:
I think you're ignoring context completely. Again, the question he was asked was what ideas did he have to improve F1. Having drivers fend for themselves was just one of several. And so in this context, it's hard to see this as him seeking an advantage over his teammate.

Anyway, I don't want to argue about this anymore, so I'm gonna just drop it.

Fair enough. I clearly don't see it the same way you do, but I also don't want to completely dominate this thread with the argument.

Just to be clear however, I'm not saying he thinks it will give him an advantage over Bottas specifically. As one of the best drivers on the grid, I think he believes it will give him an advantage over almost everyone, including his teammate. I'm baffled by why you can't at least see that as a possibility, but I suppose I have to accept it and move on. :thumbup:

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4068
Exediron wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I think you're ignoring context completely. Again, the question he was asked was what ideas did he have to improve F1. Having drivers fend for themselves was just one of several. And so in this context, it's hard to see this as him seeking an advantage over his teammate.

Anyway, I don't want to argue about this anymore, so I'm gonna just drop it.

Fair enough. I clearly don't see it the same way you do, but I also don't want to completely dominate this thread with the argument.

Just to be clear however, I'm not saying he thinks it will give him an advantage over Bottas specifically. As one of the best drivers on the grid, I think he believes it will give him an advantage over almost everyone, including his teammate. I'm baffled by why you can't at least see that as a possibility, but I suppose I have to accept it and move on. :thumbup:

Just as an olive branch; I do see what your saying and I do agree that he believes that he would benefit from a system where drivers do not share data. I simply wouldn't characterize it as seeking an advantage because it fundamentally is not an advantage to anyone. It is a way to make the driver's championship more of a drivers' championship by removing the advantage of being able to see someone else's data.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 18, 2017 2:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1236
Good discussion and debate. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 1019
And ... one more good reason why I am so opposed to the "team" concept in Formula One. Too many aspects of a driver's performance and outcome is linked to this "team" crap.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 6:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5742
Location: Nebraska, USA
The only way to change it, Blinky, is to have one car teams with no affiliation with other teams. I don't see that happening.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 11:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4068
I don't like all the "team" stuff either. Racing is fundamentally an individual sport. All the team stuff does is create situations that compromise the integrity of the competition (team orders, preferential treatment, etc.).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 11:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 6622
sandman1347 wrote:
I don't like all the "team" stuff either. Racing is fundamentally an individual sport. All the team stuff does is create situations that compromise the integrity of the competition (team orders, preferential treatment, etc.).

Personally I think the conflict of interests between teams and drivers is part of what makes the sport so great. It creates so much drama as Vettel-Webber and Hamilton-Rosberg have shown us in recent years and of course the likes of Prost-Senna in the past.

I love it!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 11:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3375
sandman1347 wrote:
I don't like all the "team" stuff either. Racing is fundamentally an individual sport. All the team stuff does is create situations that compromise the integrity of the competition (team orders, preferential treatment, etc.).


Dunno about that to be honest. The car is the most important thing in racing so that tends to mean the team is the most important thing. You can literally be the best driver on the grid but if you don't have the car then your skill as an individual counts for next to nothing.

Surely that makes racing fundamentally a team sport?.

_________________
"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: Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4068
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I don't like all the "team" stuff either. Racing is fundamentally an individual sport. All the team stuff does is create situations that compromise the integrity of the competition (team orders, preferential treatment, etc.).


Dunno about that to be honest. The car is the most important thing in racing so that tends to mean the team is the most important thing. You can literally be the best driver on the grid but if you don't have the car then your skill as an individual counts for next to nothing.

Surely that makes racing fundamentally a team sport?.

Sure the engineers and mechanics have to work together. The organizations can be considered teams. I get that and I don't have any problem with that. But once the lights go out, it's every man for himself. At least it should be. I want to watch a sport in which every competitor is trying to win. I'd rather not get too deep into it but this is a flaw that has been ever-present in motor sports. They are too easily manipulated by the corporations that own/run them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3375
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I don't like all the "team" stuff either. Racing is fundamentally an individual sport. All the team stuff does is create situations that compromise the integrity of the competition (team orders, preferential treatment, etc.).


Dunno about that to be honest. The car is the most important thing in racing so that tends to mean the team is the most important thing. You can literally be the best driver on the grid but if you don't have the car then your skill as an individual counts for next to nothing.

Surely that makes racing fundamentally a team sport?.

Sure the engineers and mechanics have to work together. The organizations can be considered teams. I get that and I don't have any problem with that. But once the lights go out, it's every man for himself. At least it should be. I want to watch a sport in which every competitor is trying to win. I'd rather not get too deep into it but this is a flaw that has been ever-present in motor sports. They are too easily manipulated by the corporations that own/run them.


It's certainly the drivers championship that gets the most attention worldwide so I can see where you're coming from anyway. And I personally agree with you about team orders/preferential treatment although I think BlackFlag makes a good point that it adds to the drama and over these past couple of years that drama kinda saved it at times so I'm a bit conflicted all round to be honest.

_________________
"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: Mon Mar 20, 2017 7:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10591
sandman1347 wrote:
I think you're ignoring context completely. Again, the question he was asked was what ideas did he have to improve F1. Having drivers fend for themselves was just one of several. And so in this context, it's hard to see this as him seeking an advantage over his teammate.


No, that part was covered by "I've asked my team"... :twisted:

_________________
Supporting all drivers with surnames starting with "V".

Proud member of the "It's Toro Rosso, not Torro Rosso" action committee.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 7:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 5:33 pm
Posts: 186
mds wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I think you're ignoring context completely. Again, the question he was asked was what ideas did he have to improve F1. Having drivers fend for themselves was just one of several. And so in this context, it's hard to see this as him seeking an advantage over his teammate.


No, that part was covered by "I've asked my team"... :twisted:


Did he ask in the rosberg era or bottas era.


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], Yellowbin74 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