planetf1.com

It is currently Fri Dec 15, 2017 9:37 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 9:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
babararacucudada wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
So you're now on the record as calling the Austrian GP incident Hamilton's fault (and agreeing with the above assessment of the incident)? This is important for credibility purposes.

I'm agreeing with the factually accurate statement that Hamilton turned into Rosberg, as opposed to the previous post saying the opposite.

What you're doing is removing your credibility as a commentator. If you assess that situation as Hamilton's fault, you simply don't understand racing very well. I can go find links to dozens of credible articles and videos from various experts, pundits, etc. that all agree that Rosberg was to blame for the incident. I challenge you to find a single credible source saying the opposite.


The question was regarding whether Rosberg deliberately targeted Hamilton's car. Rosberg said he was choosing his line round the corner.

Rosberg did make the corner, but we never got to see if he would have made it without the broken front wing and the impact from Hamilton's car.

I have always argued that forcing another driver off the track is against the rules. The problem was, that that was not being applied by the stewards in the inter team case of Hamilton and Rosberg, even when Hamilton went way off the normal line as in the USA and Hungary. In the case of Austria, the stewards actually applied the rule to Rosberg, and shortly after, applied it to Vettel when he out braked himself and forced Massa off the track.

So I see it as a success by Rosberg, to establish that even between team mates, it is against the rules to force another driver off the track. In Vettel's case it wasn't deliberate, but he was responsible for leaving his braking too late. Again, I was pleased to see the rule being applied.

The incidents are not equivalent. In Austin, Hamilton pushed Rosberg wide on exit. That's harsh but it's allowable. Vettel did the same to Hamilton in Spain yesterday. In Austria, Rosberg never negotiated the corner and basically tried to run Hamilton off the road without turning the wheel to make the corner. That's a no no. Had Rosberg made the corner first, he could have pushed Hamilton wide on exit if Hamilton were not already in front.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 9:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
babararacucudada wrote:

Rosberg didn't turn his car to hit Hamilton. Hamilton turned his car and hit Rosberg.
Rosberg said because he was on the inside, he could choose his line round the corner.

Rosberg was choosing a line that meant Hamilton was going to have to leave the track.

:thumbup:

So you're now on the record as calling the Austrian GP incident Hamilton's fault (and agreeing with the above assessment of the incident)? This is important for credibility purposes.

I'm agreeing with the factually accurate statement that Hamilton turned into Rosberg, as opposed to the previous post saying the opposite.

What you're doing is removing your credibility as a commentator. If you assess that situation as Hamilton's fault, you simply don't understand racing very well. I can go find links to dozens of credible articles and videos from various experts, pundits, etc. that all agree that Rosberg was to blame for the incident. I challenge you to find a single credible source saying the opposite.

Sigh, please read it properly. The accusation was that Rosberg targeted Lewis, while what actually happened was that Lewis turned in while Rosberg was trying to force him wide, which is somewhat different. I'm addressing the inaccurate comment only


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 9:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
The only thing that made it look simpler was that Hamilton wasn't weaving behind Vettel the way Vettel was behind Bottas. Vettel changed his mind twice during the attempt despite the fact that Bottas only made one defensive move. He had enough of a pace advantage at that stage in the race that he could have just smoothly pulled off the move in the DRS zone but he had some indecision in the attempt and all that weaving with the DRS open almost lost him control of the car.

It was simpler because the Mercedes was faster.

So despite the fact that this has been proven beyond any shadow of a doubt to be patently false, you still want to sing the same tune?

What nonsense. A couple of Hamilton fans desperately trying to claim black is white is not proof. The Mercedes was faster down the straight. All you need to verify that is a pair of eyes

Edit: phone autocorrect...

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/05/13/2 ... -analysis/
So the actual reality of how fast the cars were down the straight doesn't mean anything to you then? Your "eyes" know more accurately how fast the cars were than the actual speed traps I assume? It's good to know I'm speaking with someone who has no respect for fact or reality. Unfortunately this type of person has become quite common these days...

Wasn't aware they overtook each other in qualifying...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 9:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Also we have to ask were the Ferrari pace comes from because apparently it's slower on the straights but no quicker around the corners?

how do you work that out?

Just by what another poster said about Hamilton being able to follow Vettel more closely on to the pit straight than Vettel was to Bottas.

So couldn't have been anything to do with the Mercedes upgrades allowing them to follow more closely?

More closely than the Ferrari?

It's not possible?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 9:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
Zoue wrote:
Sigh, please read it properly. The accusation was that Rosberg targeted Lewis, while what actually happened was that Lewis turned in while Rosberg was trying to force him wide, which is somewhat different. I'm addressing the inaccurate comment only

The comment you're addressing wasn't inaccurate. The comment you are supporting is inaccurate.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 9:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/05/13/2 ... -analysis/
So the actual reality of how fast the cars were down the straight doesn't mean anything to you then? Your "eyes" know more accurately how fast the cars were than the actual speed traps I assume? It's good to know I'm speaking with someone who has no respect for fact or reality. Unfortunately this type of person has become quite common these days...

Wasn't aware they overtook each other in qualifying...

Really? Ever heard of parc ferme rules? Without a tow from another car and in clean air, the Ferrari had a higher top speed. This is down to the way the cars were set up for the race. Jeez you are maybe the most stubborn person in here. You must realize by now that you're wrong about this...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 10:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 12:58 pm
Posts: 669
Zoue I get the impression you might not be a Hamilton fan ? :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 10:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8742
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/05/13/2 ... -analysis/
So the actual reality of how fast the cars were down the straight doesn't mean anything to you then? Your "eyes" know more accurately how fast the cars were than the actual speed traps I assume? It's good to know I'm speaking with someone who has no respect for fact or reality. Unfortunately this type of person has become quite common these days...

Wasn't aware they overtook each other in qualifying...

Really? Ever heard of parc ferme rules? Without a tow from another car and in clean air, the Ferrari had a higher top speed. This is down to the way the cars were set up for the race. Jeez you are maybe the most stubborn person in here. You must realize by now that you're wrong about this...


Ferrari was fastest and 3rd fastest in the speed traps in qualifying (when all things are equal). Race top speeds are more ambiguous due to differing tyres at different phases etc. Its pretty obvious Mercedes had a lot more downforce this weekend, Ferrari were 1-2 for Sector 1 in qualifying (low downforce) but 0.4 off of Hamilton in the final sector (which is high downforce) this is also pretty obvious in the side by side of there laps.

It must have been Hamilton exit on the last corner, him being so quick in S3 to stay close to Vettel.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 10:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 947
lamo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/05/13/2 ... -analysis/
So the actual reality of how fast the cars were down the straight doesn't mean anything to you then? Your "eyes" know more accurately how fast the cars were than the actual speed traps I assume? It's good to know I'm speaking with someone who has no respect for fact or reality. Unfortunately this type of person has become quite common these days...

Wasn't aware they overtook each other in qualifying...

Really? Ever heard of parc ferme rules? Without a tow from another car and in clean air, the Ferrari had a higher top speed. This is down to the way the cars were set up for the race. Jeez you are maybe the most stubborn person in here. You must realize by now that you're wrong about this...


Ferrari was fastest and 3rd fastest in the speed traps in qualifying (when all things are equal). Race top speeds are more ambiguous due to differing tyres at different phases etc. Its pretty obvious Mercedes had a lot more downforce this weekend, Ferrari were 1-2 for Sector 1 in qualifying (low downforce) but 0.4 off of Hamilton in the final sector (which is high downforce) this is also pretty obvious in the side by side of there laps.

It must have been Hamilton exit on the last corner, him being so quick in S3 to stay close to Vettel.


Yes it had nothing to do with being on the harder tyres!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 10:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8742
Rockie wrote:
lamo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/05/13/2 ... -analysis/
So the actual reality of how fast the cars were down the straight doesn't mean anything to you then? Your "eyes" know more accurately how fast the cars were than the actual speed traps I assume? It's good to know I'm speaking with someone who has no respect for fact or reality. Unfortunately this type of person has become quite common these days...

Wasn't aware they overtook each other in qualifying...

Really? Ever heard of parc ferme rules? Without a tow from another car and in clean air, the Ferrari had a higher top speed. This is down to the way the cars were set up for the race. Jeez you are maybe the most stubborn person in here. You must realize by now that you're wrong about this...


Ferrari was fastest and 3rd fastest in the speed traps in qualifying (when all things are equal). Race top speeds are more ambiguous due to differing tyres at different phases etc. Its pretty obvious Mercedes had a lot more downforce this weekend, Ferrari were 1-2 for Sector 1 in qualifying (low downforce) but 0.4 off of Hamilton in the final sector (which is high downforce) this is also pretty obvious in the side by side of there laps.

It must have been Hamilton exit on the last corner, him being so quick in S3 to stay close to Vettel.


Yes it had nothing to do with being on the harder tyres!


Harder but 3 seconds a lap quicker tyres yes.

You are under estimating the medium again, you did that a few pages ago when you claimed Vettel was over 1 second a lap quicker than Hamilton when it was soft vs medium with both in clean air, then somebody done the numbers and it was 0.5.
Vettel posted the second fastest lap of the race, less than 0.1 slower than the fastest lap on those hard boots.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 12:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
:thumbup:

So you're now on the record as calling the Austrian GP incident Hamilton's fault (and agreeing with the above assessment of the incident)? This is important for credibility purposes.

I'm agreeing with the factually accurate statement that Hamilton turned into Rosberg, as opposed to the previous post saying the opposite.

What you're doing is removing your credibility as a commentator. If you assess that situation as Hamilton's fault, you simply don't understand racing very well. I can go find links to dozens of credible articles and videos from various experts, pundits, etc. that all agree that Rosberg was to blame for the incident. I challenge you to find a single credible source saying the opposite.

Sigh, please read it properly. The accusation was that Rosberg targeted Lewis, while what actually happened was that Lewis turned in while Rosberg was trying to force him wide, which is somewhat different. I'm addressing the inaccurate comment only

Hamilton had to turn so he actually stayed on the track, Rosberg decided he wasn't going to turn until Hamilton was off the track, he also deliberately prevented Hamilton from rejoining the track, Hamilton had to run onto the grass to take avoiding action much like he had to do in Barcelona as well but unfortunately he lost control of his car so abrupt was the avoiding action he had to take.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 12:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
It was simpler because the Mercedes was faster.

So despite the fact that this has been proven beyond any shadow of a doubt to be patently false, you still want to sing the same tune?

What nonsense. A couple of Hamilton fans desperately trying to claim black is white is not proof. The Mercedes was faster down the straight. All you need to verify that is a pair of eyes

Edit: phone autocorrect...

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/05/13/2 ... -analysis/
So the actual reality of how fast the cars were down the straight doesn't mean anything to you then? Your "eyes" know more accurately how fast the cars were than the actual speed traps I assume? It's good to know I'm speaking with someone who has no respect for fact or reality. Unfortunately this type of person has become quite common these days...

Wasn't aware they overtook each other in qualifying...

Whats that got to do with which car was actually faster in a straight line, again the experts are wrong and you are right.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 12:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
how do you work that out?

Just by what another poster said about Hamilton being able to follow Vettel more closely on to the pit straight than Vettel was to Bottas.

So couldn't have been anything to do with the Mercedes upgrades allowing them to follow more closely?

More closely than the Ferrari?

It's not possible?

I'm not saying it's not possible but you seemingly always know which car is faster whether on a straight or in the race.

Now having us both read more, apparently Mercedes have concentrated on making the car more race friendly but at the expense of straight line speed, to the affect that expert analysis from 2 sources have said that the Ferrari was faster in a straight line at Barcelona, I believe 1 source even said that the Ferrari was the faster race car?

However you want to believe that the Ferrari was inferior in all aspects and it's the same thing over and over, credit Vettel, discredit Hamilton, and to your credit you are always quite open about this in all the DOTD polls.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 12:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
lamo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/05/13/2 ... -analysis/
So the actual reality of how fast the cars were down the straight doesn't mean anything to you then? Your "eyes" know more accurately how fast the cars were than the actual speed traps I assume? It's good to know I'm speaking with someone who has no respect for fact or reality. Unfortunately this type of person has become quite common these days...

Wasn't aware they overtook each other in qualifying...

Really? Ever heard of parc ferme rules? Without a tow from another car and in clean air, the Ferrari had a higher top speed. This is down to the way the cars were set up for the race. Jeez you are maybe the most stubborn person in here. You must realize by now that you're wrong about this...


Ferrari was fastest and 3rd fastest in the speed traps in qualifying (when all things are equal). Race top speeds are more ambiguous due to differing tyres at different phases etc. Its pretty obvious Mercedes had a lot more downforce this weekend, Ferrari were 1-2 for Sector 1 in qualifying (low downforce) but 0.4 off of Hamilton in the final sector (which is high downforce) this is also pretty obvious in the side by side of there laps.

It must have been Hamilton exit on the last corner, him being so quick in S3 to stay close to Vettel.

Nail on the head.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 12:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
Rockie wrote:
lamo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/05/13/2 ... -analysis/
So the actual reality of how fast the cars were down the straight doesn't mean anything to you then? Your "eyes" know more accurately how fast the cars were than the actual speed traps I assume? It's good to know I'm speaking with someone who has no respect for fact or reality. Unfortunately this type of person has become quite common these days...

Wasn't aware they overtook each other in qualifying...

Really? Ever heard of parc ferme rules? Without a tow from another car and in clean air, the Ferrari had a higher top speed. This is down to the way the cars were set up for the race. Jeez you are maybe the most stubborn person in here. You must realize by now that you're wrong about this...


Ferrari was fastest and 3rd fastest in the speed traps in qualifying (when all things are equal). Race top speeds are more ambiguous due to differing tyres at different phases etc. Its pretty obvious Mercedes had a lot more downforce this weekend, Ferrari were 1-2 for Sector 1 in qualifying (low downforce) but 0.4 off of Hamilton in the final sector (which is high downforce) this is also pretty obvious in the side by side of there laps.

It must have been Hamilton exit on the last corner, him being so quick in S3 to stay close to Vettel.


Yes it had nothing to do with being on the harder tyres!

You sound like you have just entered the debate, have you read all the posts?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 1:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 947
pokerman wrote:


You sound like you have just entered the debate, have you read all the posts?


Read it all no different from the usual!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 4:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2900
This is a gem of a video. An absolute must watch.

https://streamable.com/nvsmo


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 4:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12387
tootsie323 wrote:
My opinion on the passes that have been debated...
Bottas did a great job of holding up Vettel through the final chicane and ensuring that he gave himself a bit of a gap into the DRS zone on the pit straight. Vettel, once he gave himself half a chance, made the best of it with a great dummy pass.
Hamilton, on the other hand, sought to give himself the best opportunity off the final corner so that he could get the pass completed ahead of the first corner at the end of the pit straight - and succeeded.
Both good efforts in their own right. Both different. Vettel's was visually the more impressive.


:thumbup:

I picked up on Bottas somewhat baulking Vettel through the final chicane every lap in order to get the power down earlier himself. Good piece of defensive driving the drew a good overtake from Vettel.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 6:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Just by what another poster said about Hamilton being able to follow Vettel more closely on to the pit straight than Vettel was to Bottas.

So couldn't have been anything to do with the Mercedes upgrades allowing them to follow more closely?

More closely than the Ferrari?

It's not possible?

I'm not saying it's not possible but you seemingly always know which car is faster whether on a straight or in the race.

Now having us both read more, apparently Mercedes have concentrated on making the car more race friendly but at the expense of straight line speed, to the affect that expert analysis from 2 sources have said that the Ferrari was faster in a straight line at Barcelona, I believe 1 source even said that the Ferrari was the faster race car?

However you want to believe that the Ferrari was inferior in all aspects and it's the same thing over and over, credit Vettel, discredit Hamilton, and to your credit you are always quite open about this in all the DOTD polls.

Well it wasn't me that said anything about Hamilton being able to follow Vettel more closely onto the pit straight, so think you have your wires crossed.

I was only responding to your usual sarcastic comment which puts 2+2 together and comes up with 5. You do this a lot. My point above is there is more than one way to interpret what the poster said, but you always choose the path of trying to be snide about it to try to discredit other points of view. There's no need


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 6:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Sigh, please read it properly. The accusation was that Rosberg targeted Lewis, while what actually happened was that Lewis turned in while Rosberg was trying to force him wide, which is somewhat different. I'm addressing the inaccurate comment only

The comment you're addressing wasn't inaccurate. The comment you are supporting is inaccurate.

Nope. Once again, you're wrong


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 6:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
So you're now on the record as calling the Austrian GP incident Hamilton's fault (and agreeing with the above assessment of the incident)? This is important for credibility purposes.

I'm agreeing with the factually accurate statement that Hamilton turned into Rosberg, as opposed to the previous post saying the opposite.

What you're doing is removing your credibility as a commentator. If you assess that situation as Hamilton's fault, you simply don't understand racing very well. I can go find links to dozens of credible articles and videos from various experts, pundits, etc. that all agree that Rosberg was to blame for the incident. I challenge you to find a single credible source saying the opposite.

Sigh, please read it properly. The accusation was that Rosberg targeted Lewis, while what actually happened was that Lewis turned in while Rosberg was trying to force him wide, which is somewhat different. I'm addressing the inaccurate comment only

Hamilton had to turn so he actually stayed on the track, Rosberg decided he wasn't going to turn until Hamilton was off the track, he also deliberately prevented Hamilton from rejoining the track, Hamilton had to run onto the grass to take avoiding action much like he had to do in Barcelona as well but unfortunately he lost control of his car so abrupt was the avoiding action he had to take.

which is different to saying he targeted him, He tried to run him off the road, sure, and left him nowhere to go, but it is factually accurate to say that Lewis turned into Rosberg, not the other war round


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 6:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
So despite the fact that this has been proven beyond any shadow of a doubt to be patently false, you still want to sing the same tune?

What nonsense. A couple of Hamilton fans desperately trying to claim black is white is not proof. The Mercedes was faster down the straight. All you need to verify that is a pair of eyes

Edit: phone autocorrect...

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/05/13/2 ... -analysis/
So the actual reality of how fast the cars were down the straight doesn't mean anything to you then? Your "eyes" know more accurately how fast the cars were than the actual speed traps I assume? It's good to know I'm speaking with someone who has no respect for fact or reality. Unfortunately this type of person has become quite common these days...

Wasn't aware they overtook each other in qualifying...

Whats that got to do with which car was actually faster in a straight line, again the experts are wrong and you are right.

No, because the quote above is about qualifying. Please read

Lewis passed Vettel before turning into the corner. Vettel was alongside Bottas when both turned into the corner. This much you can see with the naked eye. So Lewis' pass was more straightforward because he breezed by the Ferrari, whereas Vettel didn't have that speed advantage and had to complete the move going into the turn itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 6:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
Andy2402 wrote:
Zoue I get the impression you might not be a Hamilton fan ? :lol:

It's nothing to do with Hamilton. It's to do with a small but extremely vocal section of his supporters who cannot accept anything other than that their hero must have been fighting against the odds on any given moment. Every. Single. Time. This weekend is a hilarious example. Lewis performed a straightforward DRS pass with a strong tyre advantage. Job well done. For anybody else there wouldn't have been anything other than a brief comment about it. But for Lewis it has to be bigged up into something it isn't. It's either incredible, or he worked miracles with a slower car, etc. He can't possible be seen to be having even the smallest advantage, ever. It always has to be an uphill battle, even when it's clearly anything but. It's Mansell by proxy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 7:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12387
Zoue wrote:
Andy2402 wrote:
Zoue I get the impression you might not be a Hamilton fan ? :lol:

It's nothing to do with Hamilton. It's to do with a small but extremely vocal section of his supporters who cannot accept anything other than that their hero must have been fighting against the odds on any given moment. Every. Single. Time. This weekend is a hilarious example. Lewis performed a straightforward DRS pass with a strong tyre advantage. Job well done. For anybody else there wouldn't have been anything other than a brief comment about it. But for Lewis it has to be bigged up into something it isn't. It's either incredible, or he worked miracles with a slower car, etc. He can't possible be seen to be having even the smallest advantage, ever. It always has to be an uphill battle, even when it's clearly anything but. It's Mansell by proxy


Sorry but I think this is just daft. Nobody has said his win was a "miracle" and nobody has denied he hasn't had a huge advantage over most of the field from 2014-16. What you've written above makes me think you're playing it up in your head to be more than it is.

Hamilton has a lot of fans on this forum, the vast majority of which are pretty reasonable and fair in there judgement. I think you are becoming increasingly less so as time goes on.

I would rather Vettel wins the championship this year so I'm not exactly a Hamilton fan but on going attempts to discredit Hamilton frustrates even me so you can hardly be surprised when you get a reaction from them. Especially when you misappropriate the position of the vast majority of Hamilton fans with comments like those above.


Edit - A grand total of two posters made positive comments about Hamilton's overtake on the race thread. One said it was "Beautiful and the other said it was "Incredible". It's hardly that vocal.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 8:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Andy2402 wrote:
Zoue I get the impression you might not be a Hamilton fan ? :lol:

It's nothing to do with Hamilton. It's to do with a small but extremely vocal section of his supporters who cannot accept anything other than that their hero must have been fighting against the odds on any given moment. Every. Single. Time. This weekend is a hilarious example. Lewis performed a straightforward DRS pass with a strong tyre advantage. Job well done. For anybody else there wouldn't have been anything other than a brief comment about it. But for Lewis it has to be bigged up into something it isn't. It's either incredible, or he worked miracles with a slower car, etc. He can't possible be seen to be having even the smallest advantage, ever. It always has to be an uphill battle, even when it's clearly anything but. It's Mansell by proxy


Sorry but I think this is just daft. Nobody has said his win was a "miracle" and nobody has denied he hasn't had a huge advantage over most of the field from 2014-16. What you've written above makes me think you're playing it up in your head to be more than it is.

Hamilton has a lot of fans on this forum, the vast majority of which are pretty reasonable and fair in there judgement. I think you are becoming increasingly less so as time goes on.

I would rather Vettel wins the championship this year so I'm not exactly a Hamilton fan but on going attempts to discredit Hamilton frustrates even me so you can hardly be surprised when you get a reaction from them. Especially when you misappropriate the position of the vast majority of Hamilton fans with comments like those above.


Edit - A grand total of two posters made positive comments about Hamilton's overtake on the race thread. One said it was "Beautiful and the other said it was "Incredible". It's hardly that vocal.

I'm not misappropriating anything, thank you very much. And no-one's discrediting Hamilton, so I think you have your wires crossed. But I think you are being disingenuous in your description above. I don't know how I can be accused of of misappropriating the position of the vast majority of Hamilton fans when I specifically said a small but vocal section. And there have been ore than two posters in this discussion, so i think you are being less then truthful, I'm afraid


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 8:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12387
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Andy2402 wrote:
Zoue I get the impression you might not be a Hamilton fan ? :lol:

It's nothing to do with Hamilton. It's to do with a small but extremely vocal section of his supporters who cannot accept anything other than that their hero must have been fighting against the odds on any given moment. Every. Single. Time. This weekend is a hilarious example. Lewis performed a straightforward DRS pass with a strong tyre advantage. Job well done. For anybody else there wouldn't have been anything other than a brief comment about it. But for Lewis it has to be bigged up into something it isn't. It's either incredible, or he worked miracles with a slower car, etc. He can't possible be seen to be having even the smallest advantage, ever. It always has to be an uphill battle, even when it's clearly anything but. It's Mansell by proxy


Sorry but I think this is just daft. Nobody has said his win was a "miracle" and nobody has denied he hasn't had a huge advantage over most of the field from 2014-16. What you've written above makes me think you're playing it up in your head to be more than it is.

Hamilton has a lot of fans on this forum, the vast majority of which are pretty reasonable and fair in there judgement. I think you are becoming increasingly less so as time goes on.

I would rather Vettel wins the championship this year so I'm not exactly a Hamilton fan but on going attempts to discredit Hamilton frustrates even me so you can hardly be surprised when you get a reaction from them. Especially when you misappropriate the position of the vast majority of Hamilton fans with comments like those above.


Edit - A grand total of two posters made positive comments about Hamilton's overtake on the race thread. One said it was "Beautiful and the other said it was "Incredible". It's hardly that vocal.

I'm not misappropriating anything, thank you very much. And no-one's discrediting Hamilton, so I think you have your wires crossed. But I think you are being disingenuous in your description above. I don't know how I can be accused of of misappropriating the position of the vast majority of Hamilton fans when I specifically said a small but vocal section. And there have been ore than two posters in this discussion, so i think you are being less then truthful, I'm afraid


Where have I lied?

Has anybody said his win was a miracle or that he hasn't had huge advantages BTW? Because unless they have then you surely have misappropriated peoples positions?

I mean, you literally just said right above that people hold that view.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 8:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Andy2402 wrote:
Zoue I get the impression you might not be a Hamilton fan ? :lol:

It's nothing to do with Hamilton. It's to do with a small but extremely vocal section of his supporters who cannot accept anything other than that their hero must have been fighting against the odds on any given moment. Every. Single. Time. This weekend is a hilarious example. Lewis performed a straightforward DRS pass with a strong tyre advantage. Job well done. For anybody else there wouldn't have been anything other than a brief comment about it. But for Lewis it has to be bigged up into something it isn't. It's either incredible, or he worked miracles with a slower car, etc. He can't possible be seen to be having even the smallest advantage, ever. It always has to be an uphill battle, even when it's clearly anything but. It's Mansell by proxy


Sorry but I think this is just daft. Nobody has said his win was a "miracle" and nobody has denied he hasn't had a huge advantage over most of the field from 2014-16. What you've written above makes me think you're playing it up in your head to be more than it is.

Hamilton has a lot of fans on this forum, the vast majority of which are pretty reasonable and fair in there judgement. I think you are becoming increasingly less so as time goes on.

I would rather Vettel wins the championship this year so I'm not exactly a Hamilton fan but on going attempts to discredit Hamilton frustrates even me so you can hardly be surprised when you get a reaction from them. Especially when you misappropriate the position of the vast majority of Hamilton fans with comments like those above.


Edit - A grand total of two posters made positive comments about Hamilton's overtake on the race thread. One said it was "Beautiful and the other said it was "Incredible". It's hardly that vocal.

I'm not misappropriating anything, thank you very much. And no-one's discrediting Hamilton, so I think you have your wires crossed. But I think you are being disingenuous in your description above. I don't know how I can be accused of of misappropriating the position of the vast majority of Hamilton fans when I specifically said a small but vocal section. And there have been ore than two posters in this discussion, so i think you are being less then truthful, I'm afraid


Where have I lied?

Has anybody said his win was a miracle or that he hasn't had huge advantages BTW? Because unless they have then you surely have misappropriated peoples positions?

I mean, you literally just said right above that people hold that view.

Jesus, you wrote "the vast majority of Hamilton fans," in response to me saying "a small but vocal section." How can these not be further apart? I also wrote "can't possibly be seen to be having even the smallest advantage" and you've now turned that into "huge advantages." These are the same to you?

The discussion above hasn't just been about who wrote "incredible," as you well know. That's just a part of it and has led to other points. Most of it has been about whether Hamilton had to overcome a deficit of a slower car. Why you are fixating on just one portion of what I wrote is anybody's guess, but it's not representative of what has been discussed these last couple of pages, which is why I wrote it's less than truthful.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 9:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12387
Zoue wrote:
Jesus, you wrote "the vast majority of Hamilton fans," in response to me saying "a small but vocal section." How can these not be further apart? I also wrote "can't possibly be seen to be having even the smallest advantage" and you've now turned that into "huge advantages." These are the same to you?

The discussion above hasn't just been about who wrote "incredible," as you well know. That's just a part of it and has led to other points. Most of it has been about whether Hamilton had to overcome a deficit of a slower car. Why you are fixating on just one portion of what I wrote is anybody's guess, but it's not representative of what has been discussed these last couple of pages, which is why I wrote it's less than truthful.


Not wishing to get into semantics but when someone writes "can't possibly be seen to be having even the smallest advantage" surely that means they can't be seen to have a large advantage as well? Like if I said even I'm smaller than him. it would indicate that I was large.

Anyway.

I still hold that I'm write. I've seen Poker criticise Hamilton more than I have seen you give him genuine praise.

I'm sorry if I have misinterpreted


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 9:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9720
Location: Ireland
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
So you're now on the record as calling the Austrian GP incident Hamilton's fault (and agreeing with the above assessment of the incident)? This is important for credibility purposes.

I'm agreeing with the factually accurate statement that Hamilton turned into Rosberg, as opposed to the previous post saying the opposite.

What you're doing is removing your credibility as a commentator. If you assess that situation as Hamilton's fault, you simply don't understand racing very well. I can go find links to dozens of credible articles and videos from various experts, pundits, etc. that all agree that Rosberg was to blame for the incident. I challenge you to find a single credible source saying the opposite.

Sigh, please read it properly. The accusation was that Rosberg targeted Lewis, while what actually happened was that Lewis turned in while Rosberg was trying to force him wide, which is somewhat different. I'm addressing the inaccurate comment only

Hamilton had to turn so he actually stayed on the track, Rosberg decided he wasn't going to turn until Hamilton was off the track, he also deliberately prevented Hamilton from rejoining the track, Hamilton had to run onto the grass to take avoiding action much like he had to do in Barcelona as well but unfortunately he lost control of his car so abrupt was the avoiding action he had to take.

Austria (Rosberg 100% at fault) wasn't the same as Barcelona (both at fault)

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 9:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1829
kleefton wrote:
This is a gem of a video. An absolute must watch.

https://streamable.com/nvsmo


That is great analysis!

_________________
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 9:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Jesus, you wrote "the vast majority of Hamilton fans," in response to me saying "a small but vocal section." How can these not be further apart? I also wrote "can't possibly be seen to be having even the smallest advantage" and you've now turned that into "huge advantages." These are the same to you?

The discussion above hasn't just been about who wrote "incredible," as you well know. That's just a part of it and has led to other points. Most of it has been about whether Hamilton had to overcome a deficit of a slower car. Why you are fixating on just one portion of what I wrote is anybody's guess, but it's not representative of what has been discussed these last couple of pages, which is why I wrote it's less than truthful.


Not wishing to get into semantics but when someone writes "can't possibly be seen to be having even the smallest advantage" surely that means they can't be seen to have a large advantage as well? Like if I said even I'm smaller than him. it would indicate that I was large.

Anyway.

I still hold that I'm write. I've seen Poker criticise Hamilton more than I have seen you give him genuine praise.

I'm sorry if I have misinterpreted

The implication of "can't possibly be seen to be having even the smallest advantage" is that he must always be seen to be at a disadvantage one way or the other. So in the above example, it couldn't be just a straightforward DRS pass, but the Ferrari must have been faster therefore Hamilton performed a feat. It's nonsense.

I'm not running up a tally of compliments. I don't care if pokerman criticises Hamilton more than I praise him. I judge each situation on its merits, not on whether Driver A is due praise or not. I said "job well done" in relation to the pass but don't think it merited much more than that, I'm afraid. That's praise in my book. Does everything have to be over the top?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 9:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 6753
Herb wrote:
kleefton wrote:
This is a gem of a video. An absolute must watch.

https://streamable.com/nvsmo


That is great analysis!

:thumbup: what will be interesting is whether his point about Mercedes looking good at slow speed tracks holds true at Monaco. We thought the same about Russia after all and Ferrari were clearly better. I have a feeling a lot of it comes down to setup, Mercedes prioritising slow speed while Ferrari focused on high speed in Spain.

Can't wait to see which car works marginally better at Monaco - man this is a good season :]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 10:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 9:08 pm
Posts: 1531
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:

I'm agreeing with the factually accurate statement that Hamilton turned into Rosberg, as opposed to the previous post saying the opposite.

What you're doing is removing your credibility as a commentator. If you assess that situation as Hamilton's fault, you simply don't understand racing very well. I can go find links to dozens of credible articles and videos from various experts, pundits, etc. that all agree that Rosberg was to blame for the incident. I challenge you to find a single credible source saying the opposite.

Sigh, please read it properly. The accusation was that Rosberg targeted Lewis, while what actually happened was that Lewis turned in while Rosberg was trying to force him wide, which is somewhat different. I'm addressing the inaccurate comment only

Hamilton had to turn so he actually stayed on the track, Rosberg decided he wasn't going to turn until Hamilton was off the track, he also deliberately prevented Hamilton from rejoining the track, Hamilton had to run onto the grass to take avoiding action much like he had to do in Barcelona as well but unfortunately he lost control of his car so abrupt was the avoiding action he had to take.


Rosberg said he was choosing his line round the corner. We don't know at what point he was going to turn, because Hamilton turned into him before he initiated his turn. That doesn't exclude what you say, but it illustrates that there are other explanations.
Hamilton always had the option of waiting until Rosberg turned - which would have avoided the contact.

It's the responsibility of a driver who is off the track to make a safe return to the track. It's not the responsibility of drivers on the track to assist him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 11:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12387
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Jesus, you wrote "the vast majority of Hamilton fans," in response to me saying "a small but vocal section." How can these not be further apart? I also wrote "can't possibly be seen to be having even the smallest advantage" and you've now turned that into "huge advantages." These are the same to you?

The discussion above hasn't just been about who wrote "incredible," as you well know. That's just a part of it and has led to other points. Most of it has been about whether Hamilton had to overcome a deficit of a slower car. Why you are fixating on just one portion of what I wrote is anybody's guess, but it's not representative of what has been discussed these last couple of pages, which is why I wrote it's less than truthful.


Not wishing to get into semantics but when someone writes "can't possibly be seen to be having even the smallest advantage" surely that means they can't be seen to have a large advantage as well? Like if I said even I'm smaller than him. it would indicate that I was large.

Anyway.

I still hold that I'm write. I've seen Poker criticise Hamilton more than I have seen you give him genuine praise.

I'm sorry if I have misinterpreted

The implication of "can't possibly be seen to be having even the smallest advantage" is that he must always be seen to be at a disadvantage one way or the other. So in the above example, it couldn't be just a straightforward DRS pass, but the Ferrari must have been faster therefore Hamilton performed a feat. It's nonsense.

I'm not running up a tally of compliments. I don't care if pokerman criticises Hamilton more than I praise him. I judge each situation on its merits, not on whether Driver A is due praise or not. I said "job well done" in relation to the pass but don't think it merited much more than that, I'm afraid. That's praise in my book. Does everything have to be over the top?


I think that's a pretty reasonable position to hold though. It's something that I believe personally (although I'm happy to agree a case could be made to the opposite as well). I think it's possible to hold the view that the Ferrari was quicker in Barcelona without one being a manic Hamilton fan. It's not an extreme opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 12:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
Rockie wrote:
pokerman wrote:


You sound like you have just entered the debate, have you read all the posts?


Read it all no different from the usual!

Then your post then makes no sense or ignores that comparison was being made with Vettel's pass on Bottas when Vettel was also on better tyres.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 12:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
kleefton wrote:
This is a gem of a video. An absolute must watch.

https://streamable.com/nvsmo

Yeah it's already been posted but it doesn't stop the belief that the Mercedes was quicker down the straights.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Last edited by pokerman on Tue May 16, 2017 1:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 12:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
So couldn't have been anything to do with the Mercedes upgrades allowing them to follow more closely?

More closely than the Ferrari?

It's not possible?

I'm not saying it's not possible but you seemingly always know which car is faster whether on a straight or in the race.

Now having us both read more, apparently Mercedes have concentrated on making the car more race friendly but at the expense of straight line speed, to the affect that expert analysis from 2 sources have said that the Ferrari was faster in a straight line at Barcelona, I believe 1 source even said that the Ferrari was the faster race car?

However you want to believe that the Ferrari was inferior in all aspects and it's the same thing over and over, credit Vettel, discredit Hamilton, and to your credit you are always quite open about this in all the DOTD polls.

Well it wasn't me that said anything about Hamilton being able to follow Vettel more closely onto the pit straight, so think you have your wires crossed.

I was only responding to your usual sarcastic comment which puts 2+2 together and comes up with 5. You do this a lot. My point above is there is more than one way to interpret what the poster said, but you always choose the path of trying to be snide about it to try to discredit other points of view. There's no need

There's actually a general belief now that is exactly what happened, Hamilton got a better exit onto the pit straight which enabled an easier DRS pass.

There is more than one interpretation seems to be your version of arguing that black is white, how can you still argue that the Mercedes was faster than the Ferrari on the straight?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 12:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I'm agreeing with the factually accurate statement that Hamilton turned into Rosberg, as opposed to the previous post saying the opposite.

What you're doing is removing your credibility as a commentator. If you assess that situation as Hamilton's fault, you simply don't understand racing very well. I can go find links to dozens of credible articles and videos from various experts, pundits, etc. that all agree that Rosberg was to blame for the incident. I challenge you to find a single credible source saying the opposite.

Sigh, please read it properly. The accusation was that Rosberg targeted Lewis, while what actually happened was that Lewis turned in while Rosberg was trying to force him wide, which is somewhat different. I'm addressing the inaccurate comment only

Hamilton had to turn so he actually stayed on the track, Rosberg decided he wasn't going to turn until Hamilton was off the track, he also deliberately prevented Hamilton from rejoining the track, Hamilton had to run onto the grass to take avoiding action much like he had to do in Barcelona as well but unfortunately he lost control of his car so abrupt was the avoiding action he had to take.

which is different to saying he targeted him, He tried to run him off the road, sure, and left him nowhere to go, but it is factually accurate to say that Lewis turned into Rosberg, not the other war round

If you are aiming for the car in front rather than the corner itself then that is targeting the car, Hamilton said that he didn't know exactly were Rosberg's car was just that he left plenty of room for both cars to negotiate the corner by basically running to the very edge of the track and lets not forget that Hamilton's car was in front, Rosberg had no interest in both cars negotiating the corner, he was passed the apex of the corner with his wheels pointed nearly 90 degrees to the direction of the corner and you apportion the blame on Hamilton?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 12:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
What nonsense. A couple of Hamilton fans desperately trying to claim black is white is not proof. The Mercedes was faster down the straight. All you need to verify that is a pair of eyes

Edit: phone autocorrect...

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/05/13/2 ... -analysis/
So the actual reality of how fast the cars were down the straight doesn't mean anything to you then? Your "eyes" know more accurately how fast the cars were than the actual speed traps I assume? It's good to know I'm speaking with someone who has no respect for fact or reality. Unfortunately this type of person has become quite common these days...

Wasn't aware they overtook each other in qualifying...

Whats that got to do with which car was actually faster in a straight line, again the experts are wrong and you are right.

No, because the quote above is about qualifying. Please read

Lewis passed Vettel before turning into the corner. Vettel was alongside Bottas when both turned into the corner. This much you can see with the naked eye. So Lewis' pass was more straightforward because he breezed by the Ferrari, whereas Vettel didn't have that speed advantage and had to complete the move going into the turn itself.

Hamilton had a bigger speed advantage because he carried more speed going onto the straight so he had more of a natural tow coupled with the DRS tow, how can you disassociate straight line speeds in qualifying to that in the race when the cars go into parc ferme after qualifying?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 12:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
Zoue wrote:
Andy2402 wrote:
Zoue I get the impression you might not be a Hamilton fan ? :lol:

It's nothing to do with Hamilton. It's to do with a small but extremely vocal section of his supporters who cannot accept anything other than that their hero must have been fighting against the odds on any given moment. Every. Single. Time. This weekend is a hilarious example. Lewis performed a straightforward DRS pass with a strong tyre advantage. Job well done. For anybody else there wouldn't have been anything other than a brief comment about it. But for Lewis it has to be bigged up into something it isn't. It's either incredible, or he worked miracles with a slower car, etc. He can't possible be seen to be having even the smallest advantage, ever. It always has to be an uphill battle, even when it's clearly anything but. It's Mansell by proxy

I think you need to look in the mirror, it's you who keeps telling us how inferior the Ferrari is to big up Vettel, even going against what the experts have to say.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
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