planetf1.com

It is currently Fri Aug 23, 2019 11:36 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic

who is faster? Merc or Ferrari?
Poll ended at Fri Dec 01, 2017 2:35 am
Ferrari 37%  37%  [ 44 ]
Mercedes 63%  63%  [ 74 ]
Total votes : 118
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15601
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Image

Kimi didn't have any pace today even in clean air on supersofts. Overall you'd have to say that with the qualifying advantage and (recent) reliability advantage, Mercedes has been the best car this season by a decent margin.

Yes, I'd say this title has largely been fought and won on Saturdays, where Mercedes have had a definite edge


I think the title has been lost over the last 3 sundays.

Sure, they're the most sensational examples. But before that qualifying gave the Mercs a definite edge especially on tracks where things were very close between them.[/quote

Running clean on the last 3 weekends would put Vettel about equal to Hamilton in the championship. So you can't really say he's lost it in quali because without the poor fortune he would be very much in it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3303
Can't compare on sunday with no Vettel, obviously has more pace than Kimi. If Hamilton is used for Austria and Russia then Vettel needs to be taken into consideration for Japan. Plus one of Ferrari's best tracks is taken out. Mercedes just nick it on race day.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Image

Kimi didn't have any pace today even in clean air on supersofts. Overall you'd have to say that with the qualifying advantage and (recent) reliability advantage, Mercedes has been the best car this season by a decent margin.

Yes, I'd say this title has largely been fought and won on Saturdays, where Mercedes have had a definite edge


I think the title has been lost over the last 3 sundays.

Sure, they're the most sensational examples. But before that qualifying gave the Mercs a definite edge especially on tracks where things were very close between them.[/quote

Running clean on the last 3 weekends would put Vettel about equal to Hamilton in the championship. So you can't really say he's lost it in quali because without the poor fortune he would be very much in it.

everything contributes. Without the qualifying disadvantage Vettel may well have built a buffer to minimise the damage of these last few races


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:27 pm
Posts: 1632
Location: UK
KingVoid wrote:
1. Mercedes have been faster in qualifying
2. Mercedes have had better reliability
3. Mercedes have been at least as quick in the race

When you combine these three factors, you have to admit that Mercedes has been the car to have this season.

Agreed, I'm not sure what this posturing about the strength of Mercedes is about. Anybody claiming Hamilton will win the WDC is the second best car (again) is bonkers. Hamilton has finally been in a close title fight where he has the mechanical edge rather than Kimi/Massa (2007, 2008) or Vettel (2010, 2012).

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:21 am 
Reliability is now the biggest differentiating factor between Hamilton and Vettel this year. Probably a swing of nearly 40 points from that alone.

Comparing pace each weekend becomes much less relevant now, 2005 being the prime example where Mclaren had the quicker car in probably 14 out of 18 races but was irrelevant because Kimi retired twice and had 4 engine grid penalties when overtaking was near impossible. Season over for Kimi.

The promising thing for Ferrari is they have had a car that can compete for wins in probably half the races this year, which is promising for them for next year and the Mercedes car has obvious flaws. They need a miracle now for this year though. WCC was basically sealed today.

It could end up being an odd season that ends up not being so close right at the end, we haven't had a season like that in a long time. Vettel is now as close to Ricciardo in points as he is Hamilton. Vettel has 1 win in 10 races, Hamilton 7 wins in 12.

Kind of weird that Vettel is a similar amount of points behind with 4 races to go as he was in 2015. 66 points behind then and 59 behind now.People forget, Hamilton sealed the 2015 WDC against Vettel who was in 2nd at that point, same is possible again in Austin.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2310
Vyse wrote:
I wonder how Rosberg would be fairing if he decided not to quit. Personally I think Rosberg would have locked out the front row a few times with Hamilton, aiding Hamilton win another race or 2.


Rosberg would take those wins for himself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6697
lamo wrote:
Reliability is now the biggest differentiating factor between Hamilton and Vettel this year. Probably a swing of nearly 40 points from that alone.

Comparing pace each weekend becomes much less relevant now, 2005 being the prime example where Mclaren had the quicker car in probably 14 out of 18 races but was irrelevant because Kimi retired twice and had 4 engine grid penalties when overtaking was near impossible. Season over for Kimi.

The promising thing for Ferrari is they have had a car that can compete for wins in probably half the races this year, which is promising for them for next year and the Mercedes car has obvious flaws. They need a miracle now for this year though. WCC was basically sealed today.

It could end up being an odd season that ends up not being so close right at the end, we haven't had a season like that in a long time. Vettel is now as close to Ricciardo in points as he is Hamilton. Vettel has 1 win in 10 races, Hamilton 7 wins in 12.

Kind of weird that Vettel is a similar amount of points behind with 4 races to go as he was in 2015. 66 points behind then and 59 behind now.People forget, Hamilton sealed the 2015 WDC against Vettel who was in 2nd at that point, same is possible again in Austin.

I have to get you on this again man. What do you mean "a car that could compete in probably half of the races"? I honestly can't figure out what season you're watching. Aside from Monza and maybe Silverstone, name one race this season where Ferrari had no shot at winning based on the pace of the car...I'm waiting, just one will suffice...They literally could have potentially won every race this year but one or two. Trying to characterize them as dealing with a performance disadvantage is a complete farce. That's not what happened this year and it's getting bothersome the way people hasten to spin it that way...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5228
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo wrote:
Reliability is now the biggest differentiating factor between Hamilton and Vettel this year. Probably a swing of nearly 40 points from that alone.

Comparing pace each weekend becomes much less relevant now, 2005 being the prime example where Mclaren had the quicker car in probably 14 out of 18 races but was irrelevant because Kimi retired twice and had 4 engine grid penalties when overtaking was near impossible. Season over for Kimi.

The promising thing for Ferrari is they have had a car that can compete for wins in probably half the races this year, which is promising for them for next year and the Mercedes car has obvious flaws. They need a miracle now for this year though. WCC was basically sealed today.

It could end up being an odd season that ends up not being so close right at the end, we haven't had a season like that in a long time. Vettel is now as close to Ricciardo in points as he is Hamilton. Vettel has 1 win in 10 races, Hamilton 7 wins in 12.

Kind of weird that Vettel is a similar amount of points behind with 4 races to go as he was in 2015. 66 points behind then and 59 behind now.People forget, Hamilton sealed the 2015 WDC against Vettel who was in 2nd at that point, same is possible again in Austin.

I have to get you on this again man. What do you mean "a car that could compete in probably half of the races"? I honestly can't figure out what season you're watching. Aside from Monza and maybe Silverstone, name one race this season where Ferrari had no shot at winning based on the pace of the car...I'm waiting, just one will suffice...They literally could have potentially won every race this year but one or two. Trying to characterize them as dealing with a performance disadvantage is a complete farce. That's not what happened this year and it's getting bothersome the way people hasten to spin it that way...


There's been a few for both cars. This weekend looked a Mercedes one again. Baku should have been on pace. Silverstone and Monza as you say. For Ferrari it's Monaco,Hungary,Malaysia and Singapore.

The rest you can argue about I think. The only constant advantage is the small quali one for Mercedes but even that isn't a game changer on tracks that suit Ferrari but it gives Merc an edge on the others.

_________________
"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: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:41 am 
No chance for the win in Japan, Malaysia, Monza, Silverstone, Canada and Baku on the speed/reliability of the car. So yes, 10/16 overall.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3303
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo wrote:
Reliability is now the biggest differentiating factor between Hamilton and Vettel this year. Probably a swing of nearly 40 points from that alone.

Comparing pace each weekend becomes much less relevant now, 2005 being the prime example where Mclaren had the quicker car in probably 14 out of 18 races but was irrelevant because Kimi retired twice and had 4 engine grid penalties when overtaking was near impossible. Season over for Kimi.

The promising thing for Ferrari is they have had a car that can compete for wins in probably half the races this year, which is promising for them for next year and the Mercedes car has obvious flaws. They need a miracle now for this year though. WCC was basically sealed today.

It could end up being an odd season that ends up not being so close right at the end, we haven't had a season like that in a long time. Vettel is now as close to Ricciardo in points as he is Hamilton. Vettel has 1 win in 10 races, Hamilton 7 wins in 12.

Kind of weird that Vettel is a similar amount of points behind with 4 races to go as he was in 2015. 66 points behind then and 59 behind now.People forget, Hamilton sealed the 2015 WDC against Vettel who was in 2nd at that point, same is possible again in Austin.

I have to get you on this again man. What do you mean "a car that could compete in probably half of the races"? I honestly can't figure out what season you're watching. Aside from Monza and maybe Silverstone, name one race this season where Ferrari had no shot at winning based on the pace of the car...I'm waiting, just one will suffice...They literally could have potentially won every race this year but one or two. Trying to characterize them as dealing with a performance disadvantage is a complete farce. That's not what happened this year and it's getting bothersome the way people hasten to spin it that way...


I would say Monza, Silverstone, Baku and Canada (but Vettel did get hit).
For Merecedes in Monaco, Malaysia, Hungary and Singapore.
The others Ferrari was fighting for the win and I feel in Japan they would have been.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6697
lamo wrote:
No chance for the win in Japan, Malaysia, Monza, Silverstone, Canada and Baku on the speed/reliability of the car. So yes, 10/16 overall.

Apologies if I misinterpreted your post but you phrased it in a way that doesn't seem like you're referring to reliability. Canada and Baku they absolutely could have won the race. In Canada a first lap incident compromised their whole race. Had Vettel taken the lead at the first corner instead, a win was certainly possible. Same in Baku. Vettel was right at the front before the issues took place. In fact he WOULD have won that race if not for his own penalty.

I'm not saying what races where they not fastest in. I'm saying what races did they not have a chance. Monza is definitely one and I would add Silverstone as well. Aside from those two races, there are none. The car could have competed for wins on (on performance) in 14-16 races.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5228
It wouldn't have competed in Baku on pace, Ferrari had an old ICE and were struggling with their ERS. If not for the headrest it wouldn't have been close.

_________________
"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: Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3303
sandman1347 wrote:
lamo wrote:
No chance for the win in Japan, Malaysia, Monza, Silverstone, Canada and Baku on the speed/reliability of the car. So yes, 10/16 overall.

Apologies if I misinterpreted your post but you phrased it in a way that doesn't seem like you're referring to reliability. Canada and Baku they absolutely could have won the race. In Canada a first lap incident compromised their whole race. Had Vettel taken the lead at the first corner instead, a win was certainly possible. Same in Baku. Vettel was right at the front before the issues took place. In fact he WOULD have won that race if not for his own penalty.

I'm not saying what races where they not fastest in. I'm saying what races did they not have a chance. Monza is definitely one and I would add Silverstone as well. Aside from those two races, there are none. The car could have competed for wins on (on performance) in 14-16 races.


Looking at Mercedes they have had the 3rd best car twice and maybe Monaco aswell. Ferrari just once.

I remember Amus reporting at the beginning of the season Ferrari had the best car for the first 4 races. Funny how we all see things differently.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3506
I feel that Ferrari have the faster car now, however they have taken far more risks in doing so, and their reliability is paying the price.

Mercedes have been more conservative, and their car is far less consistent with particular problems with hot temperatures and their rear tyres, however at least they are making the finish line.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5228
I think Ferrari's PU upgrade was rushed. There were reports of it being unreliable on the dyno at Spa and there's been some changes in the engine department this year I believe so I think the upgrade probably didn't give them the rewards they wanted from it and there's been some pressure to get it out.

I thought Mercedes were faster here though tbh. Track and conditions suited them and while I think the Ferrari would have been closer than Red Bull I can't see enough of a difference for an overtake and I think Lewis had some more up his sleeve if needed in the 2nd stint.

_________________
"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: Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 11:57 am
Posts: 713
Location: Scotland/Lancashire
Vettel should have taken about 65pts from the Asian leg. He took 12.

Hamilton would probably have taken 50pts if offered to him before this race trio. He has taken 68.

It's a 60-70pt swing to Hamilton and he is now as good as WDC 2017. I would still fancy Hamilton to win the WDC even without Ferrari woes as I expect Mercedes to be stronger in 3 of the 4 remaining races

_________________
I'm competing this season, if anyone is interested in how I am getting on.

Car #36 - Blog


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2310
Why Mercedes are "between clubs"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQUXPLyAf5s

An interesting and somewhat relevant little vid, though a lot of you will learn nothing new from what's detailed (because you're all so smart and all that).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 12:49 pm
Posts: 805
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
I feel that Ferrari have the faster car now, however they have taken far more risks in doing so, and their reliability is paying the price.

Mercedes have been more conservative, and their car is far less consistent with particular problems with hot temperatures and their rear tyres, however at least they are making the finish line.

What makes you think that? Yesterday's quallies suggests otherwise. Taking into account Mercedes' better qualli mode, the close to half-a-second deficit was still a very huge gap for Ferrari to overturn come race-day / race pace.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15601
Migen wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
I feel that Ferrari have the faster car now, however they have taken far more risks in doing so, and their reliability is paying the price.

Mercedes have been more conservative, and their car is far less consistent with particular problems with hot temperatures and their rear tyres, however at least they are making the finish line.

What makes you think that? Yesterday's quallies suggests otherwise. Taking into account Mercedes' better qualli mode, the close to half-a-second deficit was still a very huge gap for Ferrari to overturn come race-day / race pace.


Ferrari superior in 2 of the last 3 races...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2567
Legend says that in crash at the start in Singapore, Verstappen's engine flew out of his car and installed itself into Vettel's car.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
mikeyg123 wrote:
Migen wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
I feel that Ferrari have the faster car now, however they have taken far more risks in doing so, and their reliability is paying the price.

Mercedes have been more conservative, and their car is far less consistent with particular problems with hot temperatures and their rear tyres, however at least they are making the finish line.

What makes you think that? Yesterday's quallies suggests otherwise. Taking into account Mercedes' better qualli mode, the close to half-a-second deficit was still a very huge gap for Ferrari to overturn come race-day / race pace.


Ferrari superior in 2 of the last 3 races...


Are you serious, what, 3 breakdowns in the last 3 races or so, superior car?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15601
AnRs wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Migen wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
I feel that Ferrari have the faster car now, however they have taken far more risks in doing so, and their reliability is paying the price.

Mercedes have been more conservative, and their car is far less consistent with particular problems with hot temperatures and their rear tyres, however at least they are making the finish line.

What makes you think that? Yesterday's quallies suggests otherwise. Taking into account Mercedes' better qualli mode, the close to half-a-second deficit was still a very huge gap for Ferrari to overturn come race-day / race pace.


Ferrari superior in 2 of the last 3 races...


Are you serious, what, 3 breakdowns in the last 3 races or so, superior car?


Look at the quote train. We are clearly talking about speed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 5:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6697
The bottom line is that Ferrrari have dropped the ball repeatedly in the second half of the season. Vettel had 10 podium finishes in the first 12 races this year. Since then he has gone 4 consecutive races without a podium finish. That's a shocking turn of form for him and the team. Let's look at these last 4 races:

Monza: Definitely a Mercedes track but there's no reason Ferrari should have been behind anyone else there. They seemed to really struggle to get the car working there. It's really the only round of the season where they really had huge issues with setup.
Singapore: Ferrari were fastest here and Vettel probably would have won the race in much the same fashion as Hamilton did if he had made it through the first corner with his lead in tact. The crash at the first corner must be chalked up to driver error. It wasn't an egregious error but Vettel's chop didn't work out and it cost the team a likely haul of about 40 points in total (it also cost Vettel a chance to regain the points lead).
Malaysia: Again, Ferrari were fastest here and this time by an absolutely dominant margin. Mercedes were slow here and this was a race where Ferrari could have really given Seb a gap in the points standings had they delivered in Singapore as well. Instead, reliability issues forced Seb to start from the back and took Kimi off the starting grid altogether. This was a disaster!
Japan: My gut tells me that Mercedes would have had them beat but they certainly had the pace to compete here. Instead an outright mechanical failure during the race takes Seb out of the running and a grid penalty followed by a scrappy incident with Hulk takes Kimi out of the mix at the front.

In other words; The performance of the car has almost nothing to do with why Vettel and Ferrari have fallen apart in the championships. Lewis left Monza with a 3 point lead in the championship over Vettel. During these last 3 rounds (2 of which Ferrari were clearly faster than Mercedes) Lewis has watched his lead grow enormously. The problem has been reliability and some errors in a season in which Mercedes have been almost bulletproof and in which Hamilton has not made a significant driving error during any race.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 5:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
sandman1347 wrote:
The bottom line is that Ferrrari have dropped the ball repeatedly in the second half of the season. Vettel had 10 podium finishes in the first 12 races this year. Since then he has gone 4 consecutive races without a podium finish. That's a shocking turn of form for him and the team. Let's look at these last 4 races:

Monza: Definitely a Mercedes track but there's no reason Ferrari should have been behind anyone else there. They seemed to really struggle to get the car working there. It's really the only round of the season where they really had huge issues with setup.
Singapore: Ferrari were fastest here and Vettel probably would have won the race in much the same fashion as Hamilton did if he had made it through the first corner with his lead in tact. The crash at the first corner must be chalked up to driver error. It wasn't an egregious error but Vettel's chop didn't work out and it cost the team a likely haul of about 40 points in total (it also cost Vettel a chance to regain the points lead).
Malaysia: Again, Ferrari were fastest here and this time by an absolutely dominant margin. Mercedes were slow here and this was a race where Ferrari could have really given Seb a gap in the points standings had they delivered in Singapore as well. Instead, reliability issues forced Seb to start from the back and took Kimi off the starting grid altogether. This was a disaster!
Japan: My gut tells me that Mercedes would have had them beat but they certainly had the pace to compete here. Instead an outright mechanical failure during the race takes Seb out of the running and a grid penalty followed by a scrappy incident with Hulk takes Kimi out of the mix at the front.

In other words; The performance of the car has almost nothing to do with why Vettel and Ferrari have fallen apart in the championships. Lewis left Monza with a 3 point lead in the championship over Vettel. During these last 3 rounds (2 of which Ferrari were clearly faster than Mercedes) Lewis has watched his lead grow enormously. The problem has been reliability and some errors in a season in which Mercedes have been almost bulletproof and in which Hamilton has not made a significant driving error during any race.


Ferrari have really pushed Merc this year but in the long run they didn't had the PU margins that Merc have, simple fact : )


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 5:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6697
AnRs wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
The bottom line is that Ferrrari have dropped the ball repeatedly in the second half of the season. Vettel had 10 podium finishes in the first 12 races this year. Since then he has gone 4 consecutive races without a podium finish. That's a shocking turn of form for him and the team. Let's look at these last 4 races:

Monza: Definitely a Mercedes track but there's no reason Ferrari should have been behind anyone else there. They seemed to really struggle to get the car working there. It's really the only round of the season where they really had huge issues with setup.
Singapore: Ferrari were fastest here and Vettel probably would have won the race in much the same fashion as Hamilton did if he had made it through the first corner with his lead in tact. The crash at the first corner must be chalked up to driver error. It wasn't an egregious error but Vettel's chop didn't work out and it cost the team a likely haul of about 40 points in total (it also cost Vettel a chance to regain the points lead).
Malaysia: Again, Ferrari were fastest here and this time by an absolutely dominant margin. Mercedes were slow here and this was a race where Ferrari could have really given Seb a gap in the points standings had they delivered in Singapore as well. Instead, reliability issues forced Seb to start from the back and took Kimi off the starting grid altogether. This was a disaster!
Japan: My gut tells me that Mercedes would have had them beat but they certainly had the pace to compete here. Instead an outright mechanical failure during the race takes Seb out of the running and a grid penalty followed by a scrappy incident with Hulk takes Kimi out of the mix at the front.

In other words; The performance of the car has almost nothing to do with why Vettel and Ferrari have fallen apart in the championships. Lewis left Monza with a 3 point lead in the championship over Vettel. During these last 3 rounds (2 of which Ferrari were clearly faster than Mercedes) Lewis has watched his lead grow enormously. The problem has been reliability and some errors in a season in which Mercedes have been almost bulletproof and in which Hamilton has not made a significant driving error during any race.


Ferrari have really pushed Merc this year but in the long run they didn't had the PU margins that Merc have, simple fact : )

Because you aggressively pollute the forum with your excuses and spin, that doesn't make it "fact".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 5:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2310
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
He's matched Vettel in WDCs, now it's all about who wins that 5th one first.

You'd have to place your bets on Lewis winning 2018 too. Bottas lacks the talent to challenge him and Mercedes have an inherit advantage in this era.

When/if Mercedes sign Max in 2019 is when I think that Lewis will be knocked off his pedestal.

This championship wasn't about some sort of "inherent" advantage. This was about Ferrari coming unglued right when they had the opportunity to strike. 3 bad races in a row in crunch time (for various reasons). That's what determined the championship (assuming Hamilton hangs on to win it); not some car disadvantage. Ferrari have generally been a match for Mercedes; quicker sometimes and slower at others. They didn't lose because of the performance of the car. They lost due to reliability and mistakes.

The reliability/errors factor certainly contributed to Mercedes sitting pretty at the moment, but even without that Mercedes were usually the car to beat. This WDC was won as much on Saturday as it was on Sunday, if not more so. And in that the Mercedes have unquestionably been the car to beat

Despite the numerous times we've gone through the season race by race and shown that the Ferrari has been at least the equal of Mercedes over the course of the year, you still make this claim? That just reflects poorly on your integrity to be blunt. This has been your end-game since before the season started. Trying to position Ferrari and Vettel as dealing with a car deficit so that if they lose you have an excuse. They were not at a performance deficit overall, and anyone who's honest about the season can see that. The performance of the cars didn't create this situation. It was the performance of the team that created it. Walking away from their strongest tracks empty handed is the reason Ferrari have dropped so far back.


Taking out the reliability still leaves the qualifying, so I'd say the Mercedes has been the slightly better car regardless of reliability. Clear qualifying edge while being more or less even in the races.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 6:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6697
Invade wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
He's matched Vettel in WDCs, now it's all about who wins that 5th one first.

You'd have to place your bets on Lewis winning 2018 too. Bottas lacks the talent to challenge him and Mercedes have an inherit advantage in this era.

When/if Mercedes sign Max in 2019 is when I think that Lewis will be knocked off his pedestal.

This championship wasn't about some sort of "inherent" advantage. This was about Ferrari coming unglued right when they had the opportunity to strike. 3 bad races in a row in crunch time (for various reasons). That's what determined the championship (assuming Hamilton hangs on to win it); not some car disadvantage. Ferrari have generally been a match for Mercedes; quicker sometimes and slower at others. They didn't lose because of the performance of the car. They lost due to reliability and mistakes.

The reliability/errors factor certainly contributed to Mercedes sitting pretty at the moment, but even without that Mercedes were usually the car to beat. This WDC was won as much on Saturday as it was on Sunday, if not more so. And in that the Mercedes have unquestionably been the car to beat

Despite the numerous times we've gone through the season race by race and shown that the Ferrari has been at least the equal of Mercedes over the course of the year, you still make this claim? That just reflects poorly on your integrity to be blunt. This has been your end-game since before the season started. Trying to position Ferrari and Vettel as dealing with a car deficit so that if they lose you have an excuse. They were not at a performance deficit overall, and anyone who's honest about the season can see that. The performance of the cars didn't create this situation. It was the performance of the team that created it. Walking away from their strongest tracks empty handed is the reason Ferrari have dropped so far back.


Taking out the reliability still leaves the qualifying, so I'd say the Mercedes has been the slightly better car regardless of reliability. Clear qualifying edge while being more or less even in the races.

I think if you swapped driver lineups and had Hamilton and Bottas in red while Vettel and Kimi were in white, the points table would still be in the same order. Hamilton still leading Vettel with Bottas in third and Kimi behind a Red Bull.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 6:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
sandman1347 wrote:
I think if you swapped driver lineups and had Hamilton and Bottas in red while Vettel and Kimi were in white, the points table would still be in the same order. Hamilton still leading Vettel with Bottas in third and Kimi behind a Red Bull.


No way, pure illusions. The teams (Merc) dominance make them able to run a conservative season while Ferrari have had to push (and over) the limit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 6:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2310
sandman1347 wrote:
I think if you swapped driver lineups and had Hamilton and Bottas in red while Vettel and Kimi were in white, the points table would still be in the same order. Hamilton still leading Vettel with Bottas in third and Kimi behind a Red Bull.


I don't believe that but not based on the drivers but rather the operations of the teams as a whole. Mercedes are just sharper (and yes Hamilton will have had something to do with that too). Mercedes have been very solid. I do prefer their driver lineup too, though. Vettel has hardly endeared himself to me either this season with his various episodes, despite his generally high level performance on the year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 9:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10248
Location: Ireland
sandman1347 wrote:
Invade wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
This championship wasn't about some sort of "inherent" advantage. This was about Ferrari coming unglued right when they had the opportunity to strike. 3 bad races in a row in crunch time (for various reasons). That's what determined the championship (assuming Hamilton hangs on to win it); not some car disadvantage. Ferrari have generally been a match for Mercedes; quicker sometimes and slower at others. They didn't lose because of the performance of the car. They lost due to reliability and mistakes.

The reliability/errors factor certainly contributed to Mercedes sitting pretty at the moment, but even without that Mercedes were usually the car to beat. This WDC was won as much on Saturday as it was on Sunday, if not more so. And in that the Mercedes have unquestionably been the car to beat

Despite the numerous times we've gone through the season race by race and shown that the Ferrari has been at least the equal of Mercedes over the course of the year, you still make this claim? That just reflects poorly on your integrity to be blunt. This has been your end-game since before the season started. Trying to position Ferrari and Vettel as dealing with a car deficit so that if they lose you have an excuse. They were not at a performance deficit overall, and anyone who's honest about the season can see that. The performance of the cars didn't create this situation. It was the performance of the team that created it. Walking away from their strongest tracks empty handed is the reason Ferrari have dropped so far back.


Taking out the reliability still leaves the qualifying, so I'd say the Mercedes has been the slightly better car regardless of reliability. Clear qualifying edge while being more or less even in the races.

I think if you swapped driver lineups and had Hamilton and Bottas in red while Vettel and Kimi were in white, the points table would still be in the same order. Hamilton still leading Vettel with Bottas in third and Kimi behind a Red Bull.

I don't buy that. In the early DRS days Vettel was the king of getting on pole, absolutely belting it out of DRS range and managing the gap to the finish. No reason why he couldn't recreate similar in this year's Merc

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32145
lamo wrote:
No chance for the win in Japan, Malaysia, Monza, Silverstone, Canada and Baku on the speed/reliability of the car. So yes, 10/16 overall.

I believe the post is for the fastest car not most reliable?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 23rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2567
sandman1347 wrote:
I think if you swapped driver lineups and had Hamilton and Bottas in red while Vettel and Kimi were in white, the points table would still be in the same order. Hamilton still leading Vettel with Bottas in third and Kimi behind a Red Bull.

Every race Lewis has won this season has been from pole. The exception is Singapore, and he was leading that at the end of the first sector.

Mercedes have generally had qualifying advantage this season, on average 0.200 seconds over Ferrari I believe.

So no, in a car where he doesn't start on pole very often, Lewis would most likely not be winning the WDC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2567
The only way you can make me believe that Ferrari > Mercedes is if you can prove that Hamilton has (on average) a bigger qualifying advantage over Vettel than he does over Rosberg.

Since no one on this forum can actually prove that, and the existing evidence we have actually points to the reverse, that's the end of that debate.

Also, it takes someone truly dishonest to ignore the massive advantage of superior qualifying speed in this high-downforce era.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32145
KingVoid wrote:
The only way you can make me believe that Ferrari > Mercedes is if you can prove that Hamilton has (on average) a bigger qualifying advantage over Vettel than he does over Rosberg.

Since no one on this forum can actually prove that, and the existing evidence we have actually points to the reverse, that's the end of that debate.

Also, it takes someone truly dishonest to ignore the massive advantage of superior qualifying speed in this high-downforce era.

I'm just wondering what existing evidence exactly points to the reverse?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 23rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2567
pokerman wrote:
I'm just wondering what existing evidence exactly points to the reverse?

Webber as the common teammate of both. Yes, I'm aware of the fact that Rosberg was a rookie (a GP2 champion mind you), but still, that's the only constant we do have to compare Rosberg with Vettel.

Vettel was 21 when he joined Red Bull in 2009 and outqualified Webber 15-2 in his first season. Webber was faster in qualifying than all his teammates prior to Vettel.

Of course, if anyone wants to believe that the gap between Hamilton and Vettel in qualifying this season is due to driver ability, feel free to do so.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6697
KingVoid wrote:
The only way you can make me believe that Ferrari > Mercedes is if you can prove that Hamilton has (on average) a bigger qualifying advantage over Vettel than he does over Rosberg.

Since no one on this forum can actually prove that, and the existing evidence we have actually points to the reverse, that's the end of that debate.

Also, it takes someone truly dishonest to ignore the massive advantage of superior qualifying speed in this high-downforce era.

No one is claiming that the Ferrari is better than the Mercedes. We are merely pointing out that the Mercedes wasn't better than the Ferrari either. This was a year with 2 closely matched cars.

If pole was so crucial for Vettel, how come 3 of his 4 wins did not come from pole? How come 2 of his 3 poles did not result in wins? Aside from maybe Spa, can you name a race where Vettel lost the race primarily due to not setting the pole position?

Enough with this bogus story you've concocted. Why not discuss the actual reasons that Ferrari and Vettel came up short; which are reliability first and foremost and then some poor decisions mixed in.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2567
sandman1347 wrote:
No one is claiming that the Ferrari is better than the Mercedes. We are merely pointing out that the Mercedes wasn't better than the Ferrari either. This was a year with 2 closely matched cars.

When you take everything into consideration (qualifing pace, race pace, reliability). Mercedes has been better. If you conveniently choose to only look at race pace, they've been roughly equal.

Quote:
If pole was so crucial for Vettel, how come 3 of his 4 wins did not come from pole? How come 2 of his 3 poles did not result in wins?

In Russia, Bottas simply powered past him thanks to Mercedes' superior engine. Singapore was his own fault. If Vettel had as many poles as Hamilton this season (9), are you really going to deny that he would have won more races? Are you seriously going to deny that track position has always mattered in F1, especially in a downforce-dependent era?

Quote:
Aside from maybe Spa, can you name a race where Vettel lost the race primarily due to not setting the pole position?

China - Ferrari took a gamble on strategy precisely because Vettel did not have track position
Austria
Belgium

Then there's races like Russia and Spain that were lost because of engine power.

Quote:
Enough with this bogus story you've concocted. Why not discuss the actual reasons that Ferrari and Vettel came up short; which are reliability first and foremost and then some poor decisions mixed in.

Qualifying speed and engine power have been the biggest reasons. Vettel's mistakes in Singapore and Baku is third (and it's not like Lewis has been perfect this season).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2310
sandman1347 wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
The only way you can make me believe that Ferrari > Mercedes is if you can prove that Hamilton has (on average) a bigger qualifying advantage over Vettel than he does over Rosberg.

Since no one on this forum can actually prove that, and the existing evidence we have actually points to the reverse, that's the end of that debate.

Also, it takes someone truly dishonest to ignore the massive advantage of superior qualifying speed in this high-downforce era.

No one is claiming that the Ferrari is better than the Mercedes. We are merely pointing out that the Mercedes wasn't better than the Ferrari either. This was a year with 2 closely matched cars.

If pole was so crucial for Vettel, how come 3 of his 4 wins did not come from pole? How come 2 of his 3 poles did not result in wins? Aside from maybe Spa, can you name a race where Vettel lost the race primarily due to not setting the pole position?

Enough with this bogus story you've concocted. Why not discuss the actual reasons that Ferrari and Vettel came up short; which are reliability first and foremost and then some poor decisions mixed in.


Agree about the poor decisions, though I wonder if the reliability problems are part less optimal team operations and part risk-reward factor of pushing so hard in development and in the title race. Mercedes kind of won the mental battle and also appear to have the best balance in reacting to their situation - pushing hard and even sometimes not nailing upgrades but not compromising their reliability unduly.

Hamilton-Mercedes look mighty but Vettel-Ferrari are well positioned to continue to challenge in the future, I'd say. I highly doubt the combined WDC tally will stop at 8 (one of them will win this year so that will make it 8 already).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3303
KingVoid wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
No one is claiming that the Ferrari is better than the Mercedes. We are merely pointing out that the Mercedes wasn't better than the Ferrari either. This was a year with 2 closely matched cars.

When you take everything into consideration (qualifing pace, race pace, reliability). Mercedes has been better. If you conveniently choose to only look at race pace, they've been roughly equal.

Quote:
If pole was so crucial for Vettel, how come 3 of his 4 wins did not come from pole? How come 2 of his 3 poles did not result in wins?

In Russia, Bottas simply powered past him thanks to Mercedes' superior engine. Singapore was his own fault. If Vettel had as many poles as Hamilton this season (9), are you really going to deny that he would have won more races? Are you seriously going to deny that track position has always mattered in F1, especially in a downforce-dependent era?

Quote:
Aside from maybe Spa, can you name a race where Vettel lost the race primarily due to not setting the pole position?

China - Ferrari took a gamble on strategy precisely because Vettel did not have track position
Austria
Belgium

Then there's races like Russia and Spain that were lost because of engine power.

Quote:
Enough with this bogus story you've concocted. Why not discuss the actual reasons that Ferrari and Vettel came up short; which are reliability first and foremost and then some poor decisions mixed in.

Qualifying speed and engine power have been the biggest reasons. Vettel's mistakes in Singapore and Baku is third (and it's not like Lewis has been perfect this season).


You are completely wrong about Russia and Spain. Russia has a massive run down to turn 2 and Bottas was in the slipstream. Spain the tyre delta was 2 seconds with an extended DRS zone.
Hamilton wouldn't have overtaken Vettel without the VSC happening.

Without reliability and Vettel's mistakes it would be at least equal in the championship or Vettel just winning with 4 races to go. Game on and everything to play for.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
F1_Ernie wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
No one is claiming that the Ferrari is better than the Mercedes. We are merely pointing out that the Mercedes wasn't better than the Ferrari either. This was a year with 2 closely matched cars.

When you take everything into consideration (qualifing pace, race pace, reliability). Mercedes has been better. If you conveniently choose to only look at race pace, they've been roughly equal.

Quote:
If pole was so crucial for Vettel, how come 3 of his 4 wins did not come from pole? How come 2 of his 3 poles did not result in wins?

In Russia, Bottas simply powered past him thanks to Mercedes' superior engine. Singapore was his own fault. If Vettel had as many poles as Hamilton this season (9), are you really going to deny that he would have won more races? Are you seriously going to deny that track position has always mattered in F1, especially in a downforce-dependent era?

Quote:
Aside from maybe Spa, can you name a race where Vettel lost the race primarily due to not setting the pole position?

China - Ferrari took a gamble on strategy precisely because Vettel did not have track position
Austria
Belgium

Then there's races like Russia and Spain that were lost because of engine power.

Quote:
Enough with this bogus story you've concocted. Why not discuss the actual reasons that Ferrari and Vettel came up short; which are reliability first and foremost and then some poor decisions mixed in.

Qualifying speed and engine power have been the biggest reasons. Vettel's mistakes in Singapore and Baku is third (and it's not like Lewis has been perfect this season).


You are completely wrong about Russia and Spain. Russia has a massive run down to turn 2 and Bottas was in the slipstream. Spain the tyre delta was 2 seconds with an extended DRS zone.
Hamilton wouldn't have overtaken Vettel without the VSC happening.

Without reliability and Vettel's mistakes it would be at least equal in the championship or Vettel just winning with 4 races to go. Game on and everything to play for.

You could argue the same the other way around, tbh. Lewis' headrest denied him a guaranteed win, while in Australia it's arguable that he/Mercedes made a mistake to pit when they did. Afterwards it transpired that the tyres still had plenty of life and he could have stayed out longer and not been subsequently held up by Verstappen. And in Spain Lewis wouldn't even have been chasing if he'd gotten a better start. He had pole, after all. If you're going to argue that a perfect season would have had Vettel level or ahead of Lewis now, then by the same token a perfect season would have had Lewis pretty comfortably in the lead

In Russia you're right that the slipstream helped Bottas get in front, but the speed at which Bottas then pulled away - after, Vettel said he couldn't keep up - demonstrated just how fast the Merc was. Given what we've seen from the drivers since, one can't help but speculate as to what Lewis would have done if he'd been on form there.


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: DOLOMITE, Google [Bot] 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