planetf1.com

It is currently Tue Oct 24, 2017 7:46 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic

who is faster? Merc or Ferrari?
Poll runs till Fri Dec 01, 2017 2:35 am
Ferrari 38%  38%  [ 43 ]
Mercedes 62%  62%  [ 69 ]
Total votes : 112
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 3:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 1622
Anyone who denies that Mercedes has been the best car overall so far this season is blinded by bias, because they cannot accept that their favourite driver might just be getting outperformed by a driver with an inferior car.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 4:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20646
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
lamo wrote:
I limited it to the last 8 races as I said Mercedes had a clear advantage earlier in the year, since when it has had a reduced advantage over 1 lap. Anyway, here is the raw data...

Fastest Ferrari relative to fastest Mercedes

AUS +0.268
CHI +0.186
BAH +0.478
RUS -0.095
SPN +0.051
MON -0.045
CAN +0.330
AZE +0.900
AUS +0.042
GB +0.547
HUN -0.254

Ferrari have managed 3 front row lock outs but. Bottas did get close in Monaco but more due to Raikkonens error, Raikkonen was 0.170 up on Bottas on ideal sector times.

Ferrari has been clear faster on 2 out of 11 eleven circuits.
Ferrari also got pole in Russia which was very close between the cars.
Ferrari has been within 0.051 of Mercedes in a further 2 races.

Therefore Ferrari have either been on pole or within 0.051 of it in 5 of the 11 races. The Mercedes is certainly the better car over 1 lap and on some tracks outright dominant (GB, Baku and Bahrain) but the Ferrari has been better or basically equal in nearly half the races in qualifying.


A Vettel in his normal form, i.e. .2 - .3 quicker than KR, would have increased Ferrari's gap in Monaco and reduced Mercedes gap in Silverstone. All in all pretty even. A marginal advantage for Mercedes in qualifying. Very even in the races, swniging back and forth with the tracks changing. Ferrari smartly putting everything behind Vettel, Mercedes adament that their drivers take points from each other, Vettel leading the points - putting all this together = advantage Vettel.

What will be decisive: the development race!

As a fan of a close wdc race, one needs to root for 1st both to stay even or 2nd Mercedes being ahead, because:
M = F --> 2 or 3 horse race for the wdc; 3 horse race for wins
M >= F --> same
M >> F --> 1or 2 horse race wdc; 2 horse race wins
F >> M --> 1 horse "race" wdc and wins (2013 all over again; I am sure the Vettel brigade would love this scenario ...)
F >= M --> 1 or 2 horse race wdc; 2 or 3 horse race wins

Well, you might argue the same for a Hamilton in his normal form. Who thinks Bottas is faster than him? In three races out of the last five Hamilton's trounced Bottas by more than half a second, so it certainly looks as though he has at least a similar performance gap to his team mate as Vettel does to his. In Russia, if he'd been just a tenth faster than Bottas he would have had pole. Same for Bahrain and Monaco, where Ferrari were so all-conquering. If he'd beaten Bottas in Austria it's likely he would have finished ahead of Verstappen and ended up on the podium, too. And just a tenth would have put him on the front row in Hungary, which would have likely meant he would have been pressuring Vettel a lot harder than Kimi did and probably snatched the win there, too. So all in all if Hamilton had been firing on all cylinders in qualifying he wouldn't have needed to worry about Bottas taking points off him, much like Vettel hasn't really had to worry about Kimi overall. You can't just look at Ferrari without doing the same for Mercedes, and then their advantage looks even bigger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 4:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12049
KingVoid wrote:
Anyone who denies that Mercedes has been the best car overall so far this season is blinded by bias, because they cannot accept that their favourite driver might just be getting outperformed by a driver with an inferior car.


Why would the Ferrari being as good mean Hamilton is not being out performed?

Not a fan of any driver but I think that that the Ferrari is as good as the Merc overall and Vettel ahs been the better driver. I also think you could interpret the results as the Ferrari being better and Hamilton making the difference or the Mercedes being better and Vettel making the difference.

I mean, what if Hamilton is a lot better than Vettel or Vettel is a lot better than Hamilton? Either of those scenarios would put a completely different spin on the comparative car performance and we don't know for certain that neither are correct.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 4:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 1622
If Vettel had been driving the Mercedes and Hamilton the Ferrari, I reckon that Vettel would have a 40 point lead in the WDC. He's been much better than Hamilton this season and the car is the only thing that is keeping Hamilton in it.

Mercedes is clearly faster in qualifying, at least equal in the race, and better off the line than Ferrari. Vettel starts every weekend on the back-foot compared to Hamilton.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 4:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20646
mikeyg123 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Anyone who denies that Mercedes has been the best car overall so far this season is blinded by bias, because they cannot accept that their favourite driver might just be getting outperformed by a driver with an inferior car.


Why would the Ferrari being as good mean Hamilton is not being out performed?

Not a fan of any driver but I think that that the Ferrari is as good as the Merc overall and Vettel ahs been the better driver. I also think you could interpret the results as the Ferrari being better and Hamilton making the difference or the Mercedes being better and Vettel making the difference.

I mean, what if Hamilton is a lot better than Vettel or Vettel is a lot better than Hamilton? Either of those scenarios would put a completely different spin on the comparative car performance and we don't know for certain that neither are correct.

I don't think you could interpret the results as the Ferrari being better. Not without some very specific glasses


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 4:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3429
KingVoid wrote:
If Vettel had been driving the Mercedes and Hamilton the Ferrari, I reckon that Vettel would have a 40 point lead in the WDC. He's been much better than Hamilton this season and the car is the only thing that is keeping Hamilton in it.

Mercedes is clearly faster in qualifying, at least equal in the race, and better off the line than Ferrari. Vettel starts every weekend on the back-foot compared to Hamilton.


Like Hungary and Monaco?.

The cars are close enough that tyre pressures,track characteristics and conditions can swing the balance either way. Small advantage to Mercedes in qualifying in general but the Ferrari has looked quicker in the races several times,is the easiest to get in the right window and has no real weakness unlike Mercedes with the tyres.

Anyone trying to pretend there has been no performance swings or there is a static performance gap across the season is simply trying to make "their" driver appear better.

Whoever that driver is.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 4:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8528
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
I stayed away from drawing any conclusions, I presented the facts for yourself and readers to look at and make their own minds up over. Whilst the first 3 races part is just a something I personally feel and have a gut feeling about and also stated by Vettel himself - Ferrari had there biggest update up until that point after the fly away races in Russia - I welcome anybody to disagree with that and is certainly something that can't be proven for or against so there isn't really anymore for either of us to add to that. But having now looked into it in my detail I actually have more faith in that statement. If Australia was run again next week, my gut feeling is Vettel would be hard for Hamilton to beat in qualifying, that is a big Ferrari track.

I did not draw a conclusion - I presented the numbers and let them do the talking. You are keen to state Hungary and Monaco as track specific advantages but ignore the races the Mercedes have track specific advantages in Silverstone and Baku.

The default position is certainly Mercedes being ahead, like I have said in each of my posts and is clear from the numbers. I am not sure which part of anything I have said you disagree with (other than the first 3 race thing) ?

Nah, you're doing what detective shows like to call "leading the witness." You're clearly trying to make out the Merc advantage was biggest in the opening three races and that somehow the pendulum has swung since then. But as I've pointed out, that's just being extremely selective with interpreting the data. Pick just about any other data point and the results look very different. It's quite clear when you look at both the season as a whole and the recent races that Mercedes generally have a fairly substantial speed advantage on Saturday, with only a couple of track-specific exceptions

And if you're going to present Vettel as your star witness, it's odd that you haven't mentioned his recent interview where he's called the Mercedes qualifying advantage "game changing." It's not a minor thing but gives the team a significant advantage come Sunday. Ferrari are generally fighting an uphill battle and more often than not start each race having to work out how to get past. If that trend continues, it gives Mercedes a fairly substantial advantage for both titles, especially since more of the circuits coming up favour the Mercedes package than do the Ferrari one (as has been the case all season, in fact). Both the WDC and WCC are Mercedes to lose IMO


Not leading any witness, I posted the numbers and broke down them down to exactly what they are. You are trying to make it out like I am putting a spin on them which is simply incorrect.

5/11 races Ferrari has been within 0.051 of pole or on pole. That is a fact and anything you put can't change that and that is the only point I have been making. That is a competitive performance. Yes, Mercedes is better that is clear, Ferrari have been able to be there nearly half the time. You say that is because specific tracks like Hungary and Monaco but then play up Silverstone and Baku ignoring those being Mercedes specific tracks - who is leading the witness? We shall see just how track specific it has been in the next rounds.

If Mercedes dominate the next few races then my opinion will change like it has numerous times this season in this thread. Before Hungary I was declaring Mercedes outright dominant in here and expected Mercedes to win in Hungary. Your has remained exactly the same in here the entire time like it does on many things. What if Ferrari get pole in Spa?

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 5:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12049
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Anyone who denies that Mercedes has been the best car overall so far this season is blinded by bias, because they cannot accept that their favourite driver might just be getting outperformed by a driver with an inferior car.


Why would the Ferrari being as good mean Hamilton is not being out performed?

Not a fan of any driver but I think that that the Ferrari is as good as the Merc overall and Vettel ahs been the better driver. I also think you could interpret the results as the Ferrari being better and Hamilton making the difference or the Mercedes being better and Vettel making the difference.

I mean, what if Hamilton is a lot better than Vettel or Vettel is a lot better than Hamilton? Either of those scenarios would put a completely different spin on the comparative car performance and we don't know for certain that neither are correct.

I don't think you could interpret the results as the Ferrari being better. Not without some very specific glasses


If you think Hamilton is a lot better than Vettel (I don't) then that would be the logical way to interpret the results. For all we know Hamilton and Bottas are driving incredibly. Personally I doubt that's the case but it might be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 5:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 1622
Lotus49 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
If Vettel had been driving the Mercedes and Hamilton the Ferrari, I reckon that Vettel would have a 40 point lead in the WDC. He's been much better than Hamilton this season and the car is the only thing that is keeping Hamilton in it.

Mercedes is clearly faster in qualifying, at least equal in the race, and better off the line than Ferrari. Vettel starts every weekend on the back-foot compared to Hamilton.


Like Hungary and Monaco?.

The cars are close enough that tyre pressures,track characteristics and conditions can swing the balance either way. Small advantage to Mercedes in qualifying in general but the Ferrari has looked quicker in the races several times,is the easiest to get in the right window and has no real weakness unlike Mercedes with the tyres.

Anyone trying to pretend there has been no performance swings or there is a static performance gap across the season is simply trying to make "their" driver appear better.

Whoever that driver is.

Yes, there have been swings in performance. That doesn't change my argument that overall, Mercedes has been the better car.

There were swings in performance in 1998, there were some weekends where Ferrari was better, but overall McLaren was clearly the car to have that season.

2017 is a slightly closer version of 1998.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 5:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:39 am
Posts: 1269
I think it's still very close.

_________________
Winner of the [Charging Hamilton Trophy] !
Winner of the [Dominant Hamilton Trophy] !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 6:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3429
KingVoid wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
If Vettel had been driving the Mercedes and Hamilton the Ferrari, I reckon that Vettel would have a 40 point lead in the WDC. He's been much better than Hamilton this season and the car is the only thing that is keeping Hamilton in it.

Mercedes is clearly faster in qualifying, at least equal in the race, and better off the line than Ferrari. Vettel starts every weekend on the back-foot compared to Hamilton.


Like Hungary and Monaco?.

The cars are close enough that tyre pressures,track characteristics and conditions can swing the balance either way. Small advantage to Mercedes in qualifying in general but the Ferrari has looked quicker in the races several times,is the easiest to get in the right window and has no real weakness unlike Mercedes with the tyres.

Anyone trying to pretend there has been no performance swings or there is a static performance gap across the season is simply trying to make "their" driver appear better.

Whoever that driver is.

Yes, there have been swings in performance. That doesn't change my argument that overall, Mercedes has been the better car.

There were swings in performance in 1998, there were some weekends where Ferrari was better, but overall McLaren was clearly the car to have that season.

2017 is a slightly closer version of 1998.


It's reminding me of 07/8. Same differences and differing advantages with the swb and lwb track to track.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 6:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20646
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Anyone who denies that Mercedes has been the best car overall so far this season is blinded by bias, because they cannot accept that their favourite driver might just be getting outperformed by a driver with an inferior car.


Why would the Ferrari being as good mean Hamilton is not being out performed?

Not a fan of any driver but I think that that the Ferrari is as good as the Merc overall and Vettel ahs been the better driver. I also think you could interpret the results as the Ferrari being better and Hamilton making the difference or the Mercedes being better and Vettel making the difference.

I mean, what if Hamilton is a lot better than Vettel or Vettel is a lot better than Hamilton? Either of those scenarios would put a completely different spin on the comparative car performance and we don't know for certain that neither are correct.

I don't think you could interpret the results as the Ferrari being better. Not without some very specific glasses


If you think Hamilton is a lot better than Vettel (I don't) then that would be the logical way to interpret the results. For all we know Hamilton and Bottas are driving incredibly. Personally I doubt that's the case but it might be.

Sure, but there's nothing really to base that on. There usually has to be a grounding in reality. And there's enough variance between their qualifying times in particular to know that at least one, if not both, of the Mercedes pair is driving inconsistently. As are the Ferrari drivers, to be fair, although not quite to the same extent


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 6:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3429
Warheart01 wrote:
I think it's still very close.


Yeah,agree.

If Mercedes had won a hot Hungary with low tyre pressures I'd have sworn they'd turned a corner with the tyres but as it was since and including Monaco, when the pressures are low Ferrari have won and when high Mercedes(Should have won Baku).

We just happened to have a few high ones back to back and on power tracks that suited the lwb so it's still anyone's for me going forward.

I read Ferrari were able to reclaim 70% of the d/f they lost when they were told to stiffen their flexi floor with the Hungary new floor as well which shows their development programme is working well too.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 7:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20646
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
I stayed away from drawing any conclusions, I presented the facts for yourself and readers to look at and make their own minds up over. Whilst the first 3 races part is just a something I personally feel and have a gut feeling about and also stated by Vettel himself - Ferrari had there biggest update up until that point after the fly away races in Russia - I welcome anybody to disagree with that and is certainly something that can't be proven for or against so there isn't really anymore for either of us to add to that. But having now looked into it in my detail I actually have more faith in that statement. If Australia was run again next week, my gut feeling is Vettel would be hard for Hamilton to beat in qualifying, that is a big Ferrari track.

I did not draw a conclusion - I presented the numbers and let them do the talking. You are keen to state Hungary and Monaco as track specific advantages but ignore the races the Mercedes have track specific advantages in Silverstone and Baku.

The default position is certainly Mercedes being ahead, like I have said in each of my posts and is clear from the numbers. I am not sure which part of anything I have said you disagree with (other than the first 3 race thing) ?

Nah, you're doing what detective shows like to call "leading the witness." You're clearly trying to make out the Merc advantage was biggest in the opening three races and that somehow the pendulum has swung since then. But as I've pointed out, that's just being extremely selective with interpreting the data. Pick just about any other data point and the results look very different. It's quite clear when you look at both the season as a whole and the recent races that Mercedes generally have a fairly substantial speed advantage on Saturday, with only a couple of track-specific exceptions

And if you're going to present Vettel as your star witness, it's odd that you haven't mentioned his recent interview where he's called the Mercedes qualifying advantage "game changing." It's not a minor thing but gives the team a significant advantage come Sunday. Ferrari are generally fighting an uphill battle and more often than not start each race having to work out how to get past. If that trend continues, it gives Mercedes a fairly substantial advantage for both titles, especially since more of the circuits coming up favour the Mercedes package than do the Ferrari one (as has been the case all season, in fact). Both the WDC and WCC are Mercedes to lose IMO


Not leading any witness, I posted the numbers and broke down them down to exactly what they are. You are trying to make it out like I am putting a spin on them which is simply incorrect.

5/11 races Ferrari has been within 0.051 of pole or on pole. That is a fact and anything you put can't change that and that is the only point I have been making. That is a competitive performance. Yes, Mercedes is better that is clear, Ferrari have been able to be there nearly half the time. You say that is because specific tracks like Hungary and Monaco but then play up Silverstone and Baku ignoring those being Mercedes specific tracks - who is leading the witness? We shall see just how track specific it has been in the next rounds.

If Mercedes dominate the next few races then my opinion will change like it has numerous times this season in this thread. Before Hungary I was declaring Mercedes outright dominant in here and expected Mercedes to win in Hungary. Your has remained exactly the same in here the entire time like it does on many things. What if Ferrari get pole in Spa?

You are putting a spin on them. By making out that there is a clear delineation between the first three races and the rest. It's just not true.

I'm not ignoring Silverstone and Baku. I've mentioned that circuits characteristics may influence things. I've also pointed out that the tracks where Ferrari appear to shine are fewer in number than those where the Mercs do. Advantage Mercedes, again.

I've also said that when the Ferraris are ahead it's very close, enough so that it's at least debatable whether it's the drivers making the difference. But there have been multiple occasions where the Mercedes gap has been so huge that it's difficult to put that down to anything other than the car being comfortably ahead. Which in turn leads to speculation as to whether they have capitalised on their advantage all the time. Since the Ferraris have never enjoyed anything like that advantage, it's more of a stretch to say that of them. Again, all the evidence consistently points to the Mercedes having a "game-changing" advantage in qualifying.

I'm not sure why changing your opinion with the wind should be considered a good thing. I've maintained a consistent approach because everything I've seen over the entire season points to the Mercedes being the car to beat. Sometimes the advantage is less pronounced, but even at Monaco, supposedly "Ferrari's" track, the qualifying advantage for the Reds was minimal. Hungary was the first time they've broken 2 tenths over the Mercs: how many times has the Mercedes bettered that? Some of it could be drivers, of course, but the size of the gaps suggests otherwise.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8528
I am not changing my opinion with the wind, I am changing it with what occurs on track.
Did you not change your opinion once all year? I mean after the first 3 races the Mercedes seemed completely dominant over 1 lap and unbeatable. Did you think that then? Do you think that now?

Like Lotus said above is what I agree with entirely -
"If Mercedes had won a hot Hungary with low tyre pressures I'd have sworn they'd turned a corner with the tyres but as it was since and including Monaco"

Forget the entire first 3 race thing, that is a tiny component of the point I made and as I said my opinion and subjective and could be right or wrong. The entirety of my point is Ferrari being there 5/11 races which is a good result for them, a car with significant disadvantage doesn't fight for half the poles IMO. Yes the car isn't as strong as the Mercedes over 1 lap and Mercedes have tracks were it dominates but Mercedes is still beatable nearly half the time.

Cars that have significant advantages over 1 lap I would call the Red Bulls of 2010-2013 that took about 90% of the polls in this period. I believe this year is the closest between the best and 2nd best car we have had in qualifying since 2009?

We will have to see how the rest of the season ends up, if Ferrari end up fighting for half the poles over the season then that is a good performance from there car. But it can still go the other way with Mercedes overall dominating 1 lap pace if they dominate the 2nd half and if they do they will likely win both titles.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2017 6:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20646
lamo wrote:
I am not changing my opinion with the wind, I am changing it with what occurs on track.
Did you not change your opinion once all year? I mean after the first 3 races the Mercedes seemed completely dominant over 1 lap and unbeatable. Did you think that then? Do you think that now?

Like Lotus said above is what I agree with entirely -
"If Mercedes had won a hot Hungary with low tyre pressures I'd have sworn they'd turned a corner with the tyres but as it was since and including Monaco"

Forget the entire first 3 race thing, that is a tiny component of the point I made and as I said my opinion and subjective and could be right or wrong. The entirety of my point is Ferrari being there 5/11 races which is a good result for them, a car with significant disadvantage doesn't fight for half the poles IMO. Yes the car isn't as strong as the Mercedes over 1 lap and Mercedes have tracks were it dominates but Mercedes is still beatable nearly half the time.

Cars that have significant advantages over 1 lap I would call the Red Bulls of 2010-2013 that took about 90% of the polls in this period. I believe this year is the closest between the best and 2nd best car we have had in qualifying since 2009?

We will have to see how the rest of the season ends up, if Ferrari end up fighting for half the poles over the season then that is a good performance from there car. But it can still go the other way with Mercedes overall dominating 1 lap pace if they dominate the 2nd half and if they do they will likely win both titles.

I change my opinion if I see something change. So far, I don't think I've seen much significant change.

From very early on, I've agreed with those that the Mercedes is fundamentally the quicker car, but it is more tricky than the Ferrari to get right. I don't agree with the narrative that the Ferrari is inherently much better on its tyres, since we've only ever seen that with one driver, so it's at least possible that it's as much the driver as it is the car. But it's clear that the Ferrari seems much more comfortable in a wider variety of conditions. It has lower peaks and higher troughs than the Mercedes.

So when the Mercedes is on song, it is completely untouchable. But when it's not 100% there, the Ferrari can get within touching distance. More recently, Mercedes appear to have gotten on top of their setup issues, which explains why they've been so utterly dominant in recent qualifying. But even before the Hungary weekend, people were predicting a Ferrari resurgence, because the nature of the track suited their SWB car more than the LWB Ferrari. All of this is consistent and doesn't require a change of opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2017 6:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8528
Zoue wrote:

More recently, Mercedes appear to have gotten on top of their setup issues, which explains why they've been so utterly dominant in recent qualifying. [/quote]

I agree with most of what you say but this is our point of disagreement. To me, the Mercedes of late has dominated in Silverstone and Baku of the last 8 races (I do agree it was pretty dominant for the first 3 races too) and to put those into context during the entirety of 2016, those two tracks ranked 1/20 and 2/20 for Mercedes dominance. They 100% suit Mercedes ranked 1 and 2. During that period Ferrari have been close in Austria, Russia and Spain which given how Mercedes started the season and the nature of those tracks was very surprising to me at the time.

Given this it would not surprise me if Mercedes are 0.6 ahead in Spa or less than 0.050 ahead or even narrowly behind. After all, Verstappen nearly got pole in the Red Bull at Spa last year. The same for Monza too, Ferrari pole is possible. The qualifying is up and down and quite unpredictable from my point of view. I expected Mercedes to get pole in Hungary given there dominance of that track over the last few years and their expected "recovery" on slow speed stuff since Monaco.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2017 7:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2160
Untouchable is when you think of the last 3 years, I can't think of many races were a particular driver or car was untouchable. Silverstone, Canada, Monaco and Hungary come to mind.

Ferrari could have won any of the races up until after Monaco.

Problem is some people find a car that finished 0.6 ahead of another as untouchable.

Ferrari have brought more upgrades to Hungary testing so let's see what happens.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2017 8:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8528
Fastest Ferrari relative to fastest Mercedes (gap using best sector times of fastest Ferrari driver relative to Fastest Mercedes driver)

AUS +0.268 (+0.266)
CHI +0.186 (+0.131)
BAH +0.478 (+0.399)
RUS -0.095 (+0.130)
SPN +0.051 (couldn't find the data)
MON -0.045 (-0.170)
CAN +0.330 (+0.130)
AZE +0.900 (+1.078)
AUS +0.042 (+0.235)
GB +0.547 (+0.547)
HUN -0.254 (-0.313)

So using best individual sectors posted by individual drivers. Mercedes actually gain pole in Russia. Ferrari are a bit further ahead in Hungary and Monaco. Austria (we only got 1 run in Q3 here) leans much more toward Mercedes but Canada becomes a lot closer (I remember Vettel saying pole was possible after qualifying and being annoyed with both his runs).

This doesn't change the overall picture at all, but I found it interesting none the less and it is slightly more reliable than actual times as a driver may have made a slight error on one of his Q3 runs in one sector but still posted his best time. However, its not perfect but adds another dimension as sometimes a driver made errors twice - I think Kimi was on for pole this year but made errors on both his laps (Spain or Russia possibly?) in the final sector.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2017 8:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3429
It was Seb in Spain, he lost 4 tenths in the penultimate corner on his 2nd run. Though Lewis couldn't improve on his own time in his 2nd run in Spain so it's not as clear cut as it's Lewis's first run vs Seb's second.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 623
Location: UK
Love this gif found on Twitter showing the evolution of the Ferraris over the years, just wonder if Mercedes has anything similar.




Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 1:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2771
KingVoid wrote:
Anyone who denies that Mercedes has been the best car overall so far this season is blinded by bias, because they cannot accept that their favourite driver might just be getting outperformed by a driver with an inferior car.



I believe the Merc is slightly better, but nowhere as much as you claim it is.
You say it is similar to the 2010-2013 Redbull advantage. I say no way.

Vettel used to pull away from the field and win races with 20-30 sec margin during those Redbull dominance years. He did that so many times. If Webber could get off the line he would usually do the same. This year the Merc have only won that way when Ferrari has had trouble in the race. On race pace alone, they cannot beat Ferrari the way Redbull used to beat the others. Impossible.

Morever, Vettel is often quicker than Bottas in the race or in qualifying. At least his driving has been able to make a difference. In the V8 redbull dominance era, a driver could rarely overcome the car advantage Redbull had.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4312
Location: Michigan, USA
kleefton wrote:
Morever, Vettel is often quicker than Bottas in the race or in qualifying. At least his driving has been able to make a difference. In the V8 redbull dominance era, a driver could rarely overcome the car advantage Redbull had.

... Really?

Quite a few drivers were able to overcome the pace of the Red Bull #2 during those years. Webber never finished second in the WDC.

On top of that, the Red Bulls were not as dominant as you're making them sound, with the exception of maybe 2011 and certainly the end of 2013. But they were challenged often during that run, and two of the seasons went down to the very last race.

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 1:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2771
Exediron wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Morever, Vettel is often quicker than Bottas in the race or in qualifying. At least his driving has been able to make a difference. In the V8 redbull dominance era, a driver could rarely overcome the car advantage Redbull had.

... Really?

Quite a few drivers were able to overcome the pace of the Red Bull #2 during those years. Webber never finished second in the WDC.

On top of that, the Red Bulls were not as dominant as you're making them sound, with the exception of maybe 2011 and certainly the end of 2013. But they were challenged often during that run, and two of the seasons went down to the very last race.


Im not making them out to be that dominant. Im just pointing out they were more dominant than this years Merc.

And Im talking about those races where the redbulls were clearly the fastest cars. Of course they werent dominant at every track and all the time during those years but there were stretches where they were clearly untouchable on pace. Something this years merc has not done so far against ferrari. The fact Webber failed to take full advantage of those cars due to various reasons is irrelevant.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8528
kleefton wrote:
Exediron wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Morever, Vettel is often quicker than Bottas in the race or in qualifying. At least his driving has been able to make a difference. In the V8 redbull dominance era, a driver could rarely overcome the car advantage Redbull had.

... Really?

Quite a few drivers were able to overcome the pace of the Red Bull #2 during those years. Webber never finished second in the WDC.

On top of that, the Red Bulls were not as dominant as you're making them sound, with the exception of maybe 2011 and certainly the end of 2013. But they were challenged often during that run, and two of the seasons went down to the very last race.


Im not making them out to be that dominant. Im just pointing out they were more dominant than this years Merc.

And Im talking about those races where the redbulls were clearly the fastest cars. Of course they werent dominant at every track and all the time during those years but there were stretches where they were clearly untouchable on pace. Something this years merc has not done so far against ferrari. The fact Webber failed to take full advantage of those cars due to various reasons is irrelevant.


The key difference is also the Red Bulls of 2010,2011 and 2013 were fundamentally quicker than the opposition in all aspects. The Mercedes is only quicker than the Ferrari in Q3 due to its engine modes and then basically equal on race day baring one or two races. The Red Bull had significant advantages on both qualifying and race day.

Webber not finishing 2nd in the championship was almost entirely down to reliability issues and dreadful starts. The fact that a 33-37 year old Webber was dicing with and often beating a peak 24-28 year old Alonso and Hamilton tells you how good the cars were.

He was also only 10 points off 2nd in 2010 and 12 points off 2nd in 2011. 2013 he was 43 points behind Alonso in 2nd but Webber had 4 DNFs, Alonso 1 as well as Webber having a lot of his standard bad starts and KERS issues through the year.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 3:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20646
lamo wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Exediron wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Morever, Vettel is often quicker than Bottas in the race or in qualifying. At least his driving has been able to make a difference. In the V8 redbull dominance era, a driver could rarely overcome the car advantage Redbull had.

... Really?

Quite a few drivers were able to overcome the pace of the Red Bull #2 during those years. Webber never finished second in the WDC.

On top of that, the Red Bulls were not as dominant as you're making them sound, with the exception of maybe 2011 and certainly the end of 2013. But they were challenged often during that run, and two of the seasons went down to the very last race.


Im not making them out to be that dominant. Im just pointing out they were more dominant than this years Merc.

And Im talking about those races where the redbulls were clearly the fastest cars. Of course they werent dominant at every track and all the time during those years but there were stretches where they were clearly untouchable on pace. Something this years merc has not done so far against ferrari. The fact Webber failed to take full advantage of those cars due to various reasons is irrelevant.


The key difference is also the Red Bulls of 2010,2011 and 2013 were fundamentally quicker than the opposition in all aspects. The Mercedes is only quicker than the Ferrari in Q3 due to its engine modes and then basically equal on race day baring one or two races. The Red Bull had significant advantages on both qualifying and race day.

Webber not finishing 2nd in the championship was almost entirely down to reliability issues and dreadful starts. The fact that a 33-37 year old Webber was dicing with and often beating a peak 24-28 year old Alonso and Hamilton tells you how good the cars were.

He was also only 10 points off 2nd in 2010 and 12 points off 2nd in 2011. 2013 he was 43 points behind Alonso in 2nd but Webber had 4 DNFs, Alonso 1 as well as Webber having a lot of his standard bad starts and KERS issues through the year.

The qualifying advantage extends beyond Saturday, though. Being able to dictate the race from the front is a massive advantage. If the cars are equal on Sunday, then clearly the car behind has to work that much harder to get ahead

Webber not finishing 2nd was as much down to driving ability as it was poor starts or reliability. And the fact that he couldn't mix it well enough with the others puts his car advantage in question.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 3:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12049
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Exediron wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Morever, Vettel is often quicker than Bottas in the race or in qualifying. At least his driving has been able to make a difference. In the V8 redbull dominance era, a driver could rarely overcome the car advantage Redbull had.

... Really?

Quite a few drivers were able to overcome the pace of the Red Bull #2 during those years. Webber never finished second in the WDC.

On top of that, the Red Bulls were not as dominant as you're making them sound, with the exception of maybe 2011 and certainly the end of 2013. But they were challenged often during that run, and two of the seasons went down to the very last race.


Im not making them out to be that dominant. Im just pointing out they were more dominant than this years Merc.

And Im talking about those races where the redbulls were clearly the fastest cars. Of course they werent dominant at every track and all the time during those years but there were stretches where they were clearly untouchable on pace. Something this years merc has not done so far against ferrari. The fact Webber failed to take full advantage of those cars due to various reasons is irrelevant.


The key difference is also the Red Bulls of 2010,2011 and 2013 were fundamentally quicker than the opposition in all aspects. The Mercedes is only quicker than the Ferrari in Q3 due to its engine modes and then basically equal on race day baring one or two races. The Red Bull had significant advantages on both qualifying and race day.

Webber not finishing 2nd in the championship was almost entirely down to reliability issues and dreadful starts. The fact that a 33-37 year old Webber was dicing with and often beating a peak 24-28 year old Alonso and Hamilton tells you how good the cars were.

He was also only 10 points off 2nd in 2010 and 12 points off 2nd in 2011. 2013 he was 43 points behind Alonso in 2nd but Webber had 4 DNFs, Alonso 1 as well as Webber having a lot of his standard bad starts and KERS issues through the year.

The qualifying advantage extends beyond Saturday, though. Being able to dictate the race from the front is a massive advantage. If the cars are equal on Sunday, then clearly the car behind has to work that much harder to get ahead

Webber not finishing 2nd was as much down to driving ability as it was poor starts or reliability. And the fact that he couldn't mix it well enough with the others puts his car advantage in question.


Merc's advantage is smaller than that generally enjoyed by the Red Bulls between 2010-13.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8528
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Exediron wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Morever, Vettel is often quicker than Bottas in the race or in qualifying. At least his driving has been able to make a difference. In the V8 redbull dominance era, a driver could rarely overcome the car advantage Redbull had.

... Really?

Quite a few drivers were able to overcome the pace of the Red Bull #2 during those years. Webber never finished second in the WDC.

On top of that, the Red Bulls were not as dominant as you're making them sound, with the exception of maybe 2011 and certainly the end of 2013. But they were challenged often during that run, and two of the seasons went down to the very last race.


Im not making them out to be that dominant. Im just pointing out they were more dominant than this years Merc.

And Im talking about those races where the redbulls were clearly the fastest cars. Of course they werent dominant at every track and all the time during those years but there were stretches where they were clearly untouchable on pace. Something this years merc has not done so far against ferrari. The fact Webber failed to take full advantage of those cars due to various reasons is irrelevant.


The key difference is also the Red Bulls of 2010,2011 and 2013 were fundamentally quicker than the opposition in all aspects. The Mercedes is only quicker than the Ferrari in Q3 due to its engine modes and then basically equal on race day baring one or two races. The Red Bull had significant advantages on both qualifying and race day.

Webber not finishing 2nd in the championship was almost entirely down to reliability issues and dreadful starts. The fact that a 33-37 year old Webber was dicing with and often beating a peak 24-28 year old Alonso and Hamilton tells you how good the cars were.

He was also only 10 points off 2nd in 2010 and 12 points off 2nd in 2011. 2013 he was 43 points behind Alonso in 2nd but Webber had 4 DNFs, Alonso 1 as well as Webber having a lot of his standard bad starts and KERS issues through the year.

The qualifying advantage extends beyond Saturday, though. Being able to dictate the race from the front is a massive advantage. If the cars are equal on Sunday, then clearly the car behind has to work that much harder to get ahead

Webber not finishing 2nd was as much down to driving ability as it was poor starts or reliability. And the fact that he couldn't mix it well enough with the others puts his car advantage in question.


Indeed, the qualifying advantage does extend in that you have track position. But for Red Bull it also meant, track position and lap time advantage going into the race. They didn't have to worry about being undercut, overcut or strategy - they usually drove off into the distance and if they lost position off the line they had the speed to get back via overtaking or strategy.

Yes, Webber wasn't a great driver especially at years 33-37 but he beat Alonso in 2011, got within 10 points of him in 2010 and 43 points of him in 2013 with considerable worst luck. I rate Alonso as one of the best of all time and old Webber, I do not rate that highly. So if its close between Webber and Alonso, I am looking toward the car.

Likewise, Webber beat Hamilton in 2010, 2011 and 2013. Although for all of Mark's reliability woes at Red Bull he actually had a bulletproof car in 2010 and nearly won the title off the back of that.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 937
mikeyg123 wrote:
Merc's advantage is smaller than that generally enjoyed by the Red Bulls between 2010-13.


This has to be from an alternate reality.

Mercs advantage is smaller than Redbull's really?

After round 11 Mercedes have taken 8 poles.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12049
Rockie wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Merc's advantage is smaller than that generally enjoyed by the Red Bulls between 2010-13.


This has to be from an alternate reality.

Mercs advantage is smaller than Redbull's really?

After round 11 Mercedes have taken 8 poles.


Red Bull 2010 - 10/11 poles
Red Bull 2011 - 11/11 poles

Are numerous people really trying to argue this Merc has a bigger pace advantage than the 2010 or 2011 Red Bull?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:11 pm
Posts: 1684
mikeyg123 wrote:
Rockie wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Merc's advantage is smaller than that generally enjoyed by the Red Bulls between 2010-13.


This has to be from an alternate reality.

Mercs advantage is smaller than Redbull's really?

After round 11 Mercedes have taken 8 poles.


Red Bull 2010 - 10/11 poles
Red Bull 2011 - 11/11 poles

Are numerous people really trying to argue this Merc has a bigger pace advantage than the 2010 or 2011 Red Bull?


Worth noting that the 2010 pole which didn't go to Red Bull was Hamilton running extremely low fuel (to the point he ran out of fuel on the in lap) at Montreal, and both Red Bulls running the prime tyre in Q3.

Ferrari already have 3 front row lockouts this season. I don't remember any other team (apart from Red Bull) getting a front row lockout in 2010 or 2011.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3429
The Red Bulls in 10/11 and second half of 13 clearly had a bigger advantage than this Mercedes does, Mercedes have only dominated and looked out of reach in 1 weekend this year. 2012 with the McLaren and first half of 13 with the Ferrari/Lotus on a Sunday and Mercedes on a Saturday might be more comparable.

This is far more like 2007/8 for me though, even down to swb/lwb concepts giving different advantages track to track and only a two horse race.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 12:49 pm
Posts: 669
kleefton wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Anyone who denies that Mercedes has been the best car overall so far this season is blinded by bias, because they cannot accept that their favourite driver might just be getting outperformed by a driver with an inferior car.



I believe the Merc is slightly better, but nowhere as much as you claim it is.
You say it is similar to the 2010-2013 Redbull advantage. I say no way.

Vettel used to pull away from the field and win races with 20-30 sec margin during those Redbull dominance years. He did that so many times. If Webber could get off the line he would usually do the same. This year the Merc have only won that way when Ferrari has had trouble in the race. On race pace alone, they cannot beat Ferrari the way Redbull used to beat the others. Impossible.

Morever, Vettel is often quicker than Bottas in the race or in qualifying. At least his driving has been able to make a difference. In the V8 redbull dominance era, a driver could rarely overcome the car advantage Redbull had.

I agree with you that Mercedes is only slightly better and the fact that Ferrari had 3 poles (3 front rows lockouts too!?) proves that.

But I dont think the gap at the end of the race between the leader and the one finishing 2nd is a real representative of the strength of the cars they drive anymore.
Nowdays with engines in very limited supply, stressing engine components by pulling out a huge gap to the car behind, its not a wise thing to do.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8528
Lotus49 wrote:
The Red Bulls in 10/11 and second half of 13 clearly had a bigger advantage than this Mercedes does, Mercedes have only dominated and looked out of reach in 1 weekend this year. 2012 with the McLaren and first half of 13 with the Ferrari/Lotus on a Sunday and Mercedes on a Saturday might be more comparable.

This is far more like 2007/8 for me though, even down to swb/lwb concepts giving different advantages track to track and only a two horse race.


Certainly feels closest to 2007 than any other season, with Mercedes being the 2007 Ferrari and Ferrari 2017 being the 2007 Mclaren. i.e. the Mercedes is the better overall car but the Mclaren is always able to be there give or take one or two races.

Mclaren also had the advantage on considerably less tracks that season, which is also the pattern so far with Ferrari this year. The Mclaren drivers in 2007 were also operating at a higher level than the Ferrari drivers, which I think is also the case this year with Vettel over the Mercedes pair thus far who like Kimi and Massa in 2007 have been more inconsistent even though they had a better car and find themselves behind in the title race all be it with slightly worse luck than there rivals.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 12:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 11:41 am
Posts: 157
Migen wrote:
kleefton wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Anyone who denies that Mercedes has been the best car overall so far this season is blinded by bias, because they cannot accept that their favourite driver might just be getting outperformed by a driver with an inferior car.



I believe the Merc is slightly better, but nowhere as much as you claim it is.
You say it is similar to the 2010-2013 Redbull advantage. I say no way.

Vettel used to pull away from the field and win races with 20-30 sec margin during those Redbull dominance years. He did that so many times. If Webber could get off the line he would usually do the same. This year the Merc have only won that way when Ferrari has had trouble in the race. On race pace alone, they cannot beat Ferrari the way Redbull used to beat the others. Impossible.

Morever, Vettel is often quicker than Bottas in the race or in qualifying. At least his driving has been able to make a difference. In the V8 redbull dominance era, a driver could rarely overcome the car advantage Redbull had.

I agree with you that Mercedes is only slightly better and the fact that Ferrari had 3 poles (3 front rows lockouts too!?) proves that.

But I dont think the gap at the end of the race between the leader and the one finishing 2nd is a real representative of the strength of the cars they drive anymore.
Nowdays with engines in very limited supply, stressing engine components by pulling out a huge gap to the car behind, its not a wise thing to do.


(BIB) Agree Merc marginally better over 1 lap. But isn't this Ferrari 3 pole stat somewhat misleading? With cleaner laps, could Ferrari have not secured pole on more tracks e.g. Spain, Canada, Austria? A few times now, we have heard Vettel admit he had the pace to challenge for pole, that he could have done a better job?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 12:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 11:41 am
Posts: 157
Lotus49 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
If Vettel had been driving the Mercedes and Hamilton the Ferrari, I reckon that Vettel would have a 40 point lead in the WDC. He's been much better than Hamilton this season and the car is the only thing that is keeping Hamilton in it.

Mercedes is clearly faster in qualifying, at least equal in the race, and better off the line than Ferrari. Vettel starts every weekend on the back-foot compared to Hamilton.


Like Hungary and Monaco?.

The cars are close enough that tyre pressures,track characteristics and conditions can swing the balance either way. Small advantage to Mercedes in qualifying in general but the Ferrari has looked quicker in the races several times,is the easiest to get in the right window and has no real weakness unlike Mercedes with the tyres.

Anyone trying to pretend there has been no performance swings or there is a static performance gap across the season is simply trying to make "their" driver appear better.

Whoever that driver is.


:thumbup: Good post.

I was one of the majority(on this poll) who voted for Ferrari as being the best car in the earlier rounds. Post Monaco, consensus has shifted, Merc have marginally edged ahead (barring Hungary). One car hasn’t consistently stood out as the strongest over the 11 races to date. Performance advantage has been variable.

IMO, it remains close, both cars are still in with a good shout (WDC).


Balanced post from Lotus49.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 12:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 6:28 pm
Posts: 660
Overall, Merc have had the "faster" car all season, but the FIA's plan worked nicely by banning (the suspension I think it was?) they were running right at the start of the season, giving a better title battle.

I think Merc have now got their head around that, and will only get stronger through the remainder of the year.

Looking at lost of the tracks to come, they generally suit Merc better than Ferrari - so it's going to be an interesting second half...

_________________
Should I grow a beard?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 5:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 12:49 pm
Posts: 669
SR1 wrote:
Migen wrote:
kleefton wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Anyone who denies that Mercedes has been the best car overall so far this season is blinded by bias, because they cannot accept that their favourite driver might just be getting outperformed by a driver with an inferior car.



I believe the Merc is slightly better, but nowhere as much as you claim it is.
You say it is similar to the 2010-2013 Redbull advantage. I say no way.

Vettel used to pull away from the field and win races with 20-30 sec margin during those Redbull dominance years. He did that so many times. If Webber could get off the line he would usually do the same. This year the Merc have only won that way when Ferrari has had trouble in the race. On race pace alone, they cannot beat Ferrari the way Redbull used to beat the others. Impossible.

Morever, Vettel is often quicker than Bottas in the race or in qualifying. At least his driving has been able to make a difference. In the V8 redbull dominance era, a driver could rarely overcome the car advantage Redbull had.

I agree with you that Mercedes is only slightly better and the fact that Ferrari had 3 poles (3 front rows lockouts too!?) proves that.

But I dont think the gap at the end of the race between the leader and the one finishing 2nd is a real representative of the strength of the cars they drive anymore.
Nowdays with engines in very limited supply, stressing engine components by pulling out a huge gap to the car behind, its not a wise thing to do.


(BIB) Agree Merc marginally better over 1 lap. But isn't this Ferrari 3 pole stat somewhat misleading? With cleaner laps, could Ferrari have not secured pole on more tracks e.g. Spain, Canada, Austria? A few times now, we have heard Vettel admit he had the pace to challenge for pole, that he could have done a better job?


Canada was out of reach for Ferrari IMO, its the equivalent of presuming that Mercedes could or should have had pole in Monaco if not for Hamilton's mistakes (and Mercedes not nailing the car setup properly).
As for Spain and Austria, its not as if the Mercedes drivers had flawless qualifying laps themselves and good arguments can be made that even Russia should not have been a Ferrari pole / front row in first place, with Bothas topping Q1 and Q2.

At the end, 8 / 3 in qualies in Mercedes' favor is a fair reflection I believe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8528
KingVoid wrote:
If Vettel had been driving the Mercedes and Hamilton the Ferrari, I reckon that Vettel would have a 40 point lead in the WDC. He's been much better than Hamilton this season and the car is the only thing that is keeping Hamilton in it.

Mercedes is clearly faster in qualifying, at least equal in the race, and better off the line than Ferrari. Vettel starts every weekend on the back-foot compared to Hamilton.


That is quite a large 54 point turnaround, I doubt that. Unless you envisage a scenario when Vettel was perfect every weekend which I doubt. He may well have been doing better than Hamilton, he might have been doing worse.

The 2017 Mercedes is hard to setup, that is a huge factor and both drivers have had races where they have been awful and Vettel is no stranger to dips in form or adjustment problems - part of 2010, first half of 2012, 2014 and large chunks of 2016. He isn't peak Schumacher and absolutely a machine every season and every race - if that was the case then I would agree with your 40 points ahead.

Bottas would have also beaten him quite a few times, given that Kimi has out qualified him 3 times, its likely Bottas would have done it more than that and he wouldn't have a number 1 status so incidence like Monaco and Hungary wouldn't all go in his favour.

If he was in Hamiltons Mercedes he wouldn't have won in Baku (head rest) or Austria (gearbox change) so that is two races he wouldn't have won. If he was in Bottas' he would have blown up in Spain and also had a gearbox change. Worth noting that his Ferrari has been bulletproof this year and he hasn't had a grid penalty. Then there is Hungary and Monaco (he couldn't even out qualify Kimi there) were Ferrari likely 1-2. That leaves him 7 races available to win, assuming Bottas can't beat him a single time and Hamilton can't beat him a single time without a car advantage. The time you factor that in, he wouldn't have that many more points than Hamilton, at most about 20.

Neither have been perfect this year but Vettel (especially with the driving side) has been better I agree-

Hamilton was under par in the following -
Russia - should have won (+13)
Monaco - should have been 3rd (+9)
Hungary - should have been 3rd, possibly 2nd (+3/+6)
He is 25-28 points down on getting the maximum out of the car, the big bad blotch being Russia were he was completely terrible.

Vettel was under par in the following-
Baku - should have won without brain fade (+13)
Silverstone - should have been 2nd (+12)

He is 25 points down on getting the maximum out of the car, the big error being losing his head in Baku.

I also think, if Hamilton had Kimi as his team mate, his season would be looking a bit better too. So you have to factor that into the above.

But if your start point is, Vettel is a much better driver than Hamilton then it becomes a question of how many more points would he have. One thing I would say that is in Lewis' favour, if he was in Vettels shoes, he wins Baku. That is about the only thing I can say with confidence as I have no real idea who is quicker out of Hamilton and Vettel.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4312
Location: Michigan, USA
lamo wrote:
Vettel was under par in the following-
Baku - should have won without brain fade (+13)
Silverstone - should have been 2nd (+12)

He is 25 points down on getting the maximum out of the car, the big error being losing his head in Baku.

I don't think the Silverstone one is entirely fair. Vettel was subpar in Britain, but his finishing position was due to blowing his tyre, which he wasn't to blame for. He would likely have finished third on pace alone, which is a lot closer to what you're giving him for an ideal position.

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mas, TheGiantHogweed 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