planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Apr 26, 2017 11:26 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 18567
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
He won't beat Vettel plus Vettel seems to be the #1 driver?


TBF I wouldn't have backed Rosberg to beat Hamilton either....

Kimi could be worth a flutter depending on what odds you could get.

Call me sceptical but I believe regarding Vettel Ferrari tend to operate a bit differently in comparison to Hamilton at Mercedes?

Don't think they do

You don't believe that Vettel is the #1 driver?

You don't believe Hamilton is #1 at Mercedes?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 9:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:39 am
Posts: 927
No one does dude.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 11:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 4230
Location: Mumbai, India
Can anyone interpret this chart simpler:

Image
Source - www.jamesallenonf1.com

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 11:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 9735
UnlikeUday wrote:
Can anyone interpret this chart simpler:


Race simulation for a number of drivers.

t01d3lh s m s
=> Test 1, day 3, Lewis Hamilton, strategy Soft - Medium - Soft
(you can work out the others)

So the green color shows you three stints of Hamiltons race simulation on the third day of the first test. First stint is soft tyre, then medium, then soft again. It shows which lap time was set on which lap of the race sim.

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 11:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 7173
F1_Ernie wrote:
Is long race pace really that important if it's so close? If Mercedes and Ferrari are close in pace I guess it will be another season of who leads at the first corner will most likely win the race but just different coloured cars. The chances of a Ferrari or Mercedes overtaking each other will be slim and with more 1 stop races surely it will just make qualifying even more the most important part of the weekend.


Not at all, the only reason that happened is because the lead car got to pit first and alternative strategies were not allowed. Different teams, changes everything.

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 11:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 7173
From what I am reading, Hamilton could start the seasons as a number 1. Apparently Bottas' doesn't have the pace at the moment. The comment I read was, if Mercedes have the same advantage as 2016, Bottas would not be getting P2's.

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 18567
lamo wrote:
From what I am reading, Hamilton could start the seasons as a number 1. Apparently Bottas' doesn't have the pace at the moment. The comment I read was, if Mercedes have the same advantage as 2016, Bottas would not be getting P2's.

Yes, I read that, too, from Marko. He doesn't fear Bottas, it seems, although to be fair to Bottas he's apparently a couple of tenths down on Lewis, which would still have netted him some solid 2nd places in 2016.

Mercedes have not needed to have a designated number one or two in the last three years because neither title was ever even remotely under threat. If that continues, then I don't see Merc interfering. But if e.g. Ferrari's promise is true and they are very competitive against Mercedes, then I'm confident Merc will throw their weight behind whoever is in front to ensure they maximise their chances. And it certainly looks at the moment that this will be Lewis


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 4230
Location: Mumbai, India
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
From what I am reading, Hamilton could start the seasons as a number 1. Apparently Bottas' doesn't have the pace at the moment. The comment I read was, if Mercedes have the same advantage as 2016, Bottas would not be getting P2's.

Yes, I read that, too, from Marko. He doesn't fear Bottas, it seems, although to be fair to Bottas he's apparently a couple of tenths down on Lewis, which would still have netted him some solid 2nd places in 2016.

Mercedes have not needed to have a designated number one or two in the last three years because neither title was ever even remotely under threat. If that continues, then I don't see Merc interfering. But if e.g. Ferrari's promise is true and they are very competitive against Mercedes, then I'm confident Merc will throw their weight behind whoever is in front to ensure they maximise their chances. And it certainly looks at the moment that this will be Lewis


This always was a scenario, wasn't it?

When they were shortlisting drivers for Rosberg's seat, they wanted someone as fast as Rosberg so that the WCC title also remains in their grasp.

If Ferrari are going to be as strong as they've shown, the team will naturally back Lewis unless Bottas is a bit quicker. If he's much slower than Lewis & allows the Ferraris to fit in on the 2nd & 3rd steps of the podium, not only will it be close for the WCC title but will also put his seat in jeopardy as he's on a 1 year contract. If he fails any objectives, he could be out bu it depends also on how lineant would Toto be as he's Bottas' manager as well.

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 4230
Location: Mumbai, India
A very interesting article:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/128512/tech-focus-how-f1-big-three-teams-compare

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 20196
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Zazu wrote:
Race pace is almost irrelevant. If Mercedes still hold a significant advantage in qualifying trim theyll easily be able to control the race.

Race pace is not irrelevant. Mercedes had qualifying pace to match Red Bull in 2013, and didn't come anywhere near to challenging them. If a car is faster in qualifying than in the race, their competitors will just use strategy to get ahead and stay there.

The Mercedes tyre deg in 2013 was quite atrocious at times, the tyres this year are designed to be far more durable so I don't see the same scenario playing out.

Nobody does see that happening. I'm just making the point that if the race pace is enough weaker than qualifying pace, the car will go backwards in the race - like we saw from Mercedes in 2013. I highly doubt that will happen this year.

Yeah I think you might be forgetting just how bad the Mercedes was in 2013 it would have to be some kind of meltdown for that to happen again this season.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 20196
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:

TBF I wouldn't have backed Rosberg to beat Hamilton either....

Kimi could be worth a flutter depending on what odds you could get.

Call me sceptical but I believe regarding Vettel Ferrari tend to operate a bit differently in comparison to Hamilton at Mercedes?

Don't think they do

You don't believe that Vettel is the #1 driver?


Vettel is #1 because he does better... I don't doubt that Raikkonen will be allowed to challenge or beat Vettel if he does better. The only team orders we've seen from Ferrari the past two years were when Vettel was clearly faster during the race, and they gave the order for Raikkonen not to hold up Vettel. This is logical if you're not ahead on pace compared but you're still trying to win something.

So Kimi has never been quick enough to get the benefit of similar orders?

Only once did Mercedes do this when Rosberg was 2 to 3 seconds off the pace at Monaco, I remember a race in 2013 were Hamilton had pitted and was being held up behind Rosberg who had yet to pit.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 20196
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:

TBF I wouldn't have backed Rosberg to beat Hamilton either....

Kimi could be worth a flutter depending on what odds you could get.

Call me sceptical but I believe regarding Vettel Ferrari tend to operate a bit differently in comparison to Hamilton at Mercedes?

Don't think they do

You don't believe that Vettel is the #1 driver?

You don't believe Hamilton is #1 at Mercedes?

Hamilton who was instructed to concede the WDC title at the last race last season?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10482
pokerman wrote:
So Kimi has never been quick enough to get the benefit of similar orders?

Only once did Mercedes do this when Rosberg was 2 to 3 seconds off the pace at Monaco, I remember a race in 2013 were Hamilton had pitted and was being held up behind Rosberg who had yet to pit.


Hamilton was also asked to move aside for Rosberg in Hungary one year.

I can't recall a time when Vettel was holding Kimi up?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 20196
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
From what I am reading, Hamilton could start the seasons as a number 1. Apparently Bottas' doesn't have the pace at the moment. The comment I read was, if Mercedes have the same advantage as 2016, Bottas would not be getting P2's.

Yes, I read that, too, from Marko. He doesn't fear Bottas, it seems, although to be fair to Bottas he's apparently a couple of tenths down on Lewis, which would still have netted him some solid 2nd places in 2016.

Mercedes have not needed to have a designated number one or two in the last three years because neither title was ever even remotely under threat. If that continues, then I don't see Merc interfering. But if e.g. Ferrari's promise is true and they are very competitive against Mercedes, then I'm confident Merc will throw their weight behind whoever is in front to ensure they maximise their chances. And it certainly looks at the moment that this will be Lewis

That could well play out, I think also there is another dynamic to play out with Bottas not being German which I believe makes that scenario easier to get a pass with the people back home in Germany?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 20196
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
So Kimi has never been quick enough to get the benefit of similar orders?

Only once did Mercedes do this when Rosberg was 2 to 3 seconds off the pace at Monaco, I remember a race in 2013 were Hamilton had pitted and was being held up behind Rosberg who had yet to pit.


Hamilton was also asked to move aside for Rosberg in Hungary one year.

I can't recall a time when Vettel was holding Kimi up?

Which sort of goes against someone else who suggested that Hamilton was the #1 driver.

Not being a fan of the team or either driver I don't know either so it will be interesting to observe what happens this season and if Vettel would actually comply to such an order, that sort of went down with Vettel like a lead balloon in 2014 when given the order.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Last edited by pokerman on Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 20196
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
So Kimi has never been quick enough to get the benefit of similar orders?

Only once did Mercedes do this when Rosberg was 2 to 3 seconds off the pace at Monaco, I remember a race in 2013 were Hamilton had pitted and was being held up behind Rosberg who had yet to pit.


Hamilton was also asked to move aside for Rosberg in Hungary one year.

I can't recall a time when Vettel was holding Kimi up?

Yes I've just replied to someone who answered similarly.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 2:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 9735
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Call me sceptical but I believe regarding Vettel Ferrari tend to operate a bit differently in comparison to Hamilton at Mercedes?

Don't think they do

You don't believe that Vettel is the #1 driver?


Vettel is #1 because he does better... I don't doubt that Raikkonen will be allowed to challenge or beat Vettel if he does better. The only team orders we've seen from Ferrari the past two years were when Vettel was clearly faster during the race, and they gave the order for Raikkonen not to hold up Vettel. This is logical if you're not ahead on pace compared but you're still trying to win something.

So Kimi has never been quick enough to get the benefit of similar orders?


Well, you might refresh my mind because I don't remember a single time.

Quote:
Only once did Mercedes do this when Rosberg was 2 to 3 seconds off the pace at Monaco, I remember a race in 2013 were Hamilton had pitted and was being held up behind Rosberg who had yet to pit.


Be more specific?

The last three years Mercedes have had the luxury to not have to do this, as were so far ahead that they could just let them go at it. That was why I put the following line in my post:
This is logical if you're not ahead on pace compared but you're still trying to win something.

Just give me reason to think Kimi is not allowed to challenge Vettel please, and that Vettel is a contracted #1 instead of just the better driver that gets #1 status just because he performs better.

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 2:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 18567
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Call me sceptical but I believe regarding Vettel Ferrari tend to operate a bit differently in comparison to Hamilton at Mercedes?

Don't think they do

You don't believe that Vettel is the #1 driver?

You don't believe Hamilton is #1 at Mercedes?

Hamilton who was instructed to concede the WDC title at the last race last season?

No, he wasnt. Not in the slightest.

If you believe that then your evident paranoia will make debate on this impossible I'm afraid


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 3:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10482
Semantics but he was given an instruction that had he complied would have resulted in him ending any realistic title chances. Obviously that was not the reason for the order but a known outcome of it nonetheless and therefore providing evidence toward the notion that Hamilton was not the number one driver.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 3:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 7173
Mercedes had an odd scenario of one strategy guy trying to obtain the best result for the team. It threw up some odd scenarios such as Austria 2016 where the same man battled against himself and managed to basically lose Hamilton what would have been his easiest win of the entire season. Although Hamilton wrestled it back somehow.

No way was Hamilton number 1 at Mercedes, that is about the most equal treatment two team mates can ever get. Both were asked to move over for the other and both were screwed at some point by the equal treatment rules. Hamilton in Austria 2016 and Rosberg Malaysia 2013. Plus some other smaller incidences. Thankfully Mercedes didn't have one as it would have been the worst 3 seasons in F1 history.

Regarding Bottas being a couple of tenths behind, supposedly that is over one lap. Lewis is apparently a long way ahead in race pace which for me has always been the main Hamilton strength, especially when not tyre saving. I read a quote recently that Williams (from Mercedes head of Engines) had the best chassis at 3-4 races in 2014 and should have won a couple of races. Maybe time will show that a bit more clearly. I.e. Williams just didn't have the drivers that season.

I'm not writing Bottas off, he will have to be at the top of his game though (i.e. 3 tenths quicker than Massa pace - which he often was, but other times slower or a similar pace) to have a chance with Lewis.

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 3:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 18567
mikeyg123 wrote:
Semantics but he was given an instruction that had he complied would have resulted in him ending any realistic title chances. Obviously that was not the reason for the order but a known outcome of it nonetheless and therefore providing evidence toward the notion that Hamilton was not the number one driver.

No, it doesn't. The only evidence it provides is that Mercedes didn't want to lose the possibility of a 1-2 finish. Trying to portray it as an order for Hamilton to concede the title is absurd, not to mention utterly misleading.

Many seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that having a favoured driver means that any and every decision will always be taken in his best interests. When did that become the definition? As I've stated before, Mercedes have had the luxury position in the last three years of not needing team orders. Whatever happened, they were going to win. You can't possibly compare it to e.g. Ferrari where deciding whether or not to back one driver may be the difference between a title chance or not.

But off track more often than not Mercedes threw Nico under the bus. I don't recall Lewis ever being publicly lambasted in the way Nico was and it's clear from the way management spoke that they bent over backwards to try and appease Lewis. And if Mercedes has to actually fight to win a title this year, does anyone really doubt that Mercedes would do anything differently to Ferrari and not back a driver?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 3:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2320
lamo wrote:
From what I am reading, Hamilton could start the seasons as a number 1. Apparently Bottas' doesn't have the pace at the moment. The comment I read was, if Mercedes have the same advantage as 2016, Bottas would not be getting P2's.


Really? If he couldnt get p2s in last year's car he is well over 2 tenths slower.
I expected that teammate battle to be close.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 3:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2320
Quote:
But off track more often than not Mercedes threw Nico under the bus. I don't recall Lewis ever being publicly lambasted in the way Nico was and it's clear from the way management spoke that they bent over backwards to try and appease Lewis. And if Mercedes has to actually fight to win a title this year, does anyone really doubt that Mercedes would do anything differently to Ferrari and not back a driver?


After spain lewis was publicly lambasted by lauda though. And internally you know things werent pretty either since we now know that lewis almost quit the team after what unfolded that weekend.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 3:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 18567
kleefton wrote:
Quote:
But off track more often than not Mercedes threw Nico under the bus. I don't recall Lewis ever being publicly lambasted in the way Nico was and it's clear from the way management spoke that they bent over backwards to try and appease Lewis. And if Mercedes has to actually fight to win a title this year, does anyone really doubt that Mercedes would do anything differently to Ferrari and not back a driver?


After spain lewis was publicly lambasted by lauda though. And internally you know things werent pretty either since we now know that lewis almost quit the team after what unfolded that weekend.

He didn't, though, did he? And if you call that a lambasting, what would you call after Spa 2014? Evisceration?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 4:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10482
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Semantics but he was given an instruction that had he complied would have resulted in him ending any realistic title chances. Obviously that was not the reason for the order but a known outcome of it nonetheless and therefore providing evidence toward the notion that Hamilton was not the number one driver.

No, it doesn't. The only evidence it provides is that Mercedes didn't want to lose the possibility of a 1-2 finish. Trying to portray it as an order for Hamilton to concede the title is absurd, not to mention utterly misleading.

Many seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that having a favoured driver means that any and every decision will always be taken in his best interests. When did that become the definition? As I've stated before, Mercedes have had the luxury position in the last three years of not needing team orders. Whatever happened, they were going to win. You can't possibly compare it to e.g. Ferrari where deciding whether or not to back one driver may be the difference between a title chance or not.

But off track more often than not Mercedes threw Nico under the bus. I don't recall Lewis ever being publicly lambasted in the way Nico was and it's clear from the way management spoke that they bent over backwards to try and appease Lewis. And if Mercedes has to actually fight to win a title this year, does anyone really doubt that Mercedes would do anything differently to Ferrari and not back a driver?


Seriously? Can't quite believe i'm reading that.

I think the higher ups publicly criticised him once in all the years he was at the team?

Mercedes rarely publicly criticised either driver. Spa 214 and Spain 2016 only times I can remember. Quite restrained really considering they were dealing with the most destructive team mate relationship ever. TBH both drivers could have done with a public telling off at times.

So yeah. Throwing Nico under the bus more often than not? Really?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 18567
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Semantics but he was given an instruction that had he complied would have resulted in him ending any realistic title chances. Obviously that was not the reason for the order but a known outcome of it nonetheless and therefore providing evidence toward the notion that Hamilton was not the number one driver.

No, it doesn't. The only evidence it provides is that Mercedes didn't want to lose the possibility of a 1-2 finish. Trying to portray it as an order for Hamilton to concede the title is absurd, not to mention utterly misleading.

Many seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that having a favoured driver means that any and every decision will always be taken in his best interests. When did that become the definition? As I've stated before, Mercedes have had the luxury position in the last three years of not needing team orders. Whatever happened, they were going to win. You can't possibly compare it to e.g. Ferrari where deciding whether or not to back one driver may be the difference between a title chance or not.

But off track more often than not Mercedes threw Nico under the bus. I don't recall Lewis ever being publicly lambasted in the way Nico was and it's clear from the way management spoke that they bent over backwards to try and appease Lewis. And if Mercedes has to actually fight to win a title this year, does anyone really doubt that Mercedes would do anything differently to Ferrari and not back a driver?


Seriously? Can't quite believe i'm reading that.

I think the higher ups publicly criticised him once in all the years he was at the team?

Mercedes rarely publicly criticised either driver. Spa 214 and Spain 2016 only times I can remember. Quite restrained really considering they were dealing with the most destructive team mate relationship ever. TBH both drivers could have done with a public telling off at times.

So yeah. Throwing Nico under the bus more often than not? Really?

Yes, on reflection I agree throwing under the bus was a bit harsh, so I take that back. They certainly did that after Spa and IMO treated Nico disgracefully then, but after that it was more subtle. Lauda blamed Nico for Austria, for example, where Toto was more restrained


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10482
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Semantics but he was given an instruction that had he complied would have resulted in him ending any realistic title chances. Obviously that was not the reason for the order but a known outcome of it nonetheless and therefore providing evidence toward the notion that Hamilton was not the number one driver.

No, it doesn't. The only evidence it provides is that Mercedes didn't want to lose the possibility of a 1-2 finish. Trying to portray it as an order for Hamilton to concede the title is absurd, not to mention utterly misleading.

Many seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that having a favoured driver means that any and every decision will always be taken in his best interests. When did that become the definition? As I've stated before, Mercedes have had the luxury position in the last three years of not needing team orders. Whatever happened, they were going to win. You can't possibly compare it to e.g. Ferrari where deciding whether or not to back one driver may be the difference between a title chance or not.

But off track more often than not Mercedes threw Nico under the bus. I don't recall Lewis ever being publicly lambasted in the way Nico was and it's clear from the way management spoke that they bent over backwards to try and appease Lewis. And if Mercedes has to actually fight to win a title this year, does anyone really doubt that Mercedes would do anything differently to Ferrari and not back a driver?


Seriously? Can't quite believe i'm reading that.

I think the higher ups publicly criticised him once in all the years he was at the team?

Mercedes rarely publicly criticised either driver. Spa 214 and Spain 2016 only times I can remember. Quite restrained really considering they were dealing with the most destructive team mate relationship ever. TBH both drivers could have done with a public telling off at times.

So yeah. Throwing Nico under the bus more often than not? Really?

Yes, on reflection I agree throwing under the bus was a bit harsh, so I take that back. They certainly did that after Spa and IMO treated Nico disgracefully then, but after that it was more subtle. Lauda blamed Nico for Austria, for example, where Toto was more restrained


TBF so did the stewards.

Toto made up some rubbish about Rosberg's brakes failing. One of my favourite moments of the season was when the usually clueless Herbert asked him why Rosberg didn't turn either.

To be honest the driving standards of both in 2016 when it came to each other was very poor. Mercedes should have nipped it in the bud when Rosberg pushed Hamilton off at the first corner in Australia. I don't really think a team publicly criticising a driver is a bad thing if they have persistently negatively effected the teams results for selfish reasons. Both Merc drivers were guilty of that numerous times in 2016.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 9735
mikeyg123 wrote:
Mercedes should have nipped it in the bud when Rosberg pushed Hamilton off at the first corner in Australia.


Nothing of note happened in that corner between both Mercedes, bit weird that that would have required intervention by the team.
Rosberg locked up before turning in, went a bit wide, that's about it.

Standard T1 stuff.

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10482
mds wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Mercedes should have nipped it in the bud when Rosberg pushed Hamilton off at the first corner in Australia.


Nothing of note happened in that corner between both Mercedes, bit weird that that would have required intervention by the team.
Rosberg locked up before turning in, went a bit wide, that's about it.

Standard T1 stuff.


He pushed his team mate off and it set the tone for season. Merc should have nipped it in the bud then.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 1466
mikeyg123 wrote:
mds wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Mercedes should have nipped it in the bud when Rosberg pushed Hamilton off at the first corner in Australia.


Nothing of note happened in that corner between both Mercedes, bit weird that that would have required intervention by the team.
Rosberg locked up before turning in, went a bit wide, that's about it.

Standard T1 stuff.


He pushed his team mate off and it set the tone for season. Merc should have nipped it in the bud then.


Didn't Hamilton lose a bit of his front wing?

_________________
Podiums: 1st Spain 2016, 2nd Germany 2016 and 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 9735
mikeyg123 wrote:
mds wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Mercedes should have nipped it in the bud when Rosberg pushed Hamilton off at the first corner in Australia.


Nothing of note happened in that corner between both Mercedes, bit weird that that would have required intervention by the team.
Rosberg locked up before turning in, went a bit wide, that's about it.

Standard T1 stuff.


He pushed his team mate off and it set the tone for season. Merc should have nipped it in the bud then.


Are we just repeating posts then? Ok.

Nothing of note happened in that corner between both Mercedes, bit weird that that would have required intervention by the team.
Rosberg locked up before turning in, went a bit wide, that's about it.

Standard T1 stuff.

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 9735
https://youtu.be/9aVAQXiRvWE

Nothing Rosberg did here qualifies even remotely for getting a telling of.

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4154
UnlikeUday wrote:
Can anyone interpret this chart simpler:

Image
Source - http://www.jamesallenonf1.com

That's a 28 lap stint for Vettel at the end. There was a big drop off in lap times but I don't think it was due to tire deg because the lap before was fairly quick.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10482
mds wrote:
https://youtu.be/9aVAQXiRvWE

Nothing Rosberg did here qualifies even remotely for getting a telling of.


It could have easily cost his team points. I'm not saying it was awful just that Mercedes should have taken the opportunity to show there drivers that they demand high standards of driving when racing one another. Throughout 2016 it was obvious that both Merc drivers would rather crash than let the other past. That's just not good enough from either of them. Australia was just the first example of this behaviour in 2016. Hamilton then ran Rosberg off in Canada, They crashed into each other in Spain when both of them were taking big risks and again in Austria where Rosberg got a penalty for poor driving. By flexing their muscles a bit Merc management could have possibly avoided these further incidents.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 18567
mikeyg123 wrote:
mds wrote:
https://youtu.be/9aVAQXiRvWE

Nothing Rosberg did here qualifies even remotely for getting a telling of.


It could have easily cost his team points. I'm not saying it was awful just that Mercedes should have taken the opportunity to show there drivers that they demand high standards of driving when racing one another. Throughout 2016 it was obvious that both Merc drivers would rather crash than let the other past. That's just not good enough from either of them. Australia was just the first example of this behaviour in 2016. Hamilton then ran Rosberg off in Canada, They crashed into each other in Spain when both of them were taking big risks and again in Austria where Rosberg got a penalty for poor driving. By flexing their muscles a bit Merc management could have possibly avoided these further incidents.

While I agree that they both behaved badly, this started before 2016. The reason Nico was so tremendously peed at Austin in 2015 was because Lewis ran him completely off the track at the start. That's probably when Mercedes should have had words, but to be fair it was probably overshadowed by Lewis' title triumph


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10482
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
mds wrote:
https://youtu.be/9aVAQXiRvWE

Nothing Rosberg did here qualifies even remotely for getting a telling of.


It could have easily cost his team points. I'm not saying it was awful just that Mercedes should have taken the opportunity to show there drivers that they demand high standards of driving when racing one another. Throughout 2016 it was obvious that both Merc drivers would rather crash than let the other past. That's just not good enough from either of them. Australia was just the first example of this behaviour in 2016. Hamilton then ran Rosberg off in Canada, They crashed into each other in Spain when both of them were taking big risks and again in Austria where Rosberg got a penalty for poor driving. By flexing their muscles a bit Merc management could have possibly avoided these further incidents.

While I agree that they both behaved badly, this started before 2016. The reason Nico was so tremendously peed at Austin in 2015 was because Lewis ran him completely off the track at the start. That's probably when Mercedes should have had words, but to be fair it was probably overshadowed by Lewis' title triumph


TBH anytime from the start of 2015 onward really. But I'm just going with the new year, new start thing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 7173
Hamilton put a move on Rosberg in Austin and Japan 2015, Aus 2016 was a pay back for those. Notice that Nico is the only driver in the entire field to hit the apex on T1 and the kerb on exit using the entire width of the track, risky for T1 for yourself and whoever is on the outside of you.

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 6:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 9735
It wasn't just "not awful", it was nothing. There was literally nothing that presented an opportunity for Mercedes to act upon.

_________________
Supporting all driver 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 3:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 20196
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Don't think they do

You don't believe that Vettel is the #1 driver?


Vettel is #1 because he does better... I don't doubt that Raikkonen will be allowed to challenge or beat Vettel if he does better. The only team orders we've seen from Ferrari the past two years were when Vettel was clearly faster during the race, and they gave the order for Raikkonen not to hold up Vettel. This is logical if you're not ahead on pace compared but you're still trying to win something.

So Kimi has never been quick enough to get the benefit of similar orders?


Well, you might refresh my mind because I don't remember a single time.

Quote:
Only once did Mercedes do this when Rosberg was 2 to 3 seconds off the pace at Monaco, I remember a race in 2013 were Hamilton had pitted and was being held up behind Rosberg who had yet to pit.


Be more specific?

The last three years Mercedes have had the luxury to not have to do this, as were so far ahead that they could just let them go at it. That was why I put the following line in my post:
This is logical if you're not ahead on pace compared but you're still trying to win something.

Just give me reason to think Kimi is not allowed to challenge Vettel please, and that Vettel is a contracted #1 instead of just the better driver that gets #1 status just because he performs better.

When F1 journalists say this then I think there might be something in it?

Ted Kravitz had a mid winter testing report with 2 F1 journalists, these all being British just in case that makes a difference one way or the other with you?

Anyway Kravitz out and out said that Vettel was the #1 driver and neither of the journalists pulled him up on it.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 3:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 20196
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Don't think they do

You don't believe that Vettel is the #1 driver?

You don't believe Hamilton is #1 at Mercedes?

Hamilton who was instructed to concede the WDC title at the last race last season?

No, he wasnt. Not in the slightest.

If you believe that then your evident paranoia will make debate on this impossible I'm afraid

If he was the #1 driver why would they be instructing him how he should drive relative to his teammate?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: Currently 14th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


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