planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:57 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 6:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think it would be as fair to say that Hamilton would not be leading the championship without Vettel's poor fortune as it was to say Rosberg would not be a WDC without Hamilton's poor fortune.

There honestly is no comparison.

I think there is. Bottom line is some bad luck is severely affecting a title run. Don't need to read anything more into it than that

Itemise Vettel's non fault bad luck

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 6:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21091
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think it would be as fair to say that Hamilton would not be leading the championship without Vettel's poor fortune as it was to say Rosberg would not be a WDC without Hamilton's poor fortune.

There honestly is no comparison.

I think there is. Bottom line is some bad luck is severely affecting a title run. Don't need to read anything more into it than that

Itemise Vettel's non fault bad luck

These last two races. He should have walked away with 50 points but he's ended up dropping 38 of them, with his main rival benefiting the most.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 6:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9734
Location: Ireland
pokerman wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
rivf1 wrote:
I wonder what went wrong with mercedes? they where way off the pace of the RB and Ferrari. We all know mercedes will qualify well due to that ridiculous Q3 mode they have but on race pace they where soundly beaten.


Bottas did so well with that ridiculous Q3 mode.....

The car just wasn't in the zone all weekend, pretty obvious to see. Took something pretty special from Lewis (and a lack of the faster red car in Q3) to take the pole, and he limited the damage in the race very well with a bit of help from Bottas (getting in front of Dan probably cost Dan 2nd, keeping Vettel behind for a lap or 2 arguably cost Vettel 3rd). Red Bull have clearly developed very well, and Ferrari look like they have made a gain with the new engine, wheras the new upgrades on Bottas' car didn't seem to help at all. Its a short week to get that right for Japan, though the track design may swing things back to Mercedes too.

I honestly believe his only competition in Q3 was Kimi Raikkonen. People are free to chalk that down as special if they want, it wasn't anything major for me. Pole wasn't a foregone conclusion but Kimi being Kimi helped

Do you use that comparitor everytime Vettel out qualifies Kimi?

How do you determine the perfomance of Vettel?

I typically don't consider it anything special when Vettel outqualifies Kimi either

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



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 6:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10826
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Just a coincidence that the tyre he had a massive lock up then failed?

He was doing a long stint on the tyres, towards the end of the race he complained he had lost all grip in the tyre and Ferrari left him out despite Vettel's lap times getting slower and slower, they didn't want to pit him because he would have lost positions and the tyre failed. That was a calculated risk that went wrong and nothing to do with unfortune on Vettel's part given that he helped to destroy the tyre.


It was not a "massive" lockup, others did even longer stints, it wasn't the only tyre that failed and Pirelli didn't chalk it up to the lockup.

So no, don't agree.

The tyre was finished but Ferrari left Vettel out, check his lap times he was going slower and slower and it was a massive lock up, he shortened the life of the tyre.


It was not a massive lockup ffs. Rewatch it. And the readings did not indicate that it was going to fail.

Keep ignoring the fact that Pirelli didn't chalk it up to the lockup :thumbup:

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 6:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
I've had a look, Bottas was chasing Vettel down, Vettel did his fastest lap of the race on lap 38 a 1-31.872 but by lap 41 his time had dropped to 1.33-079 his tyres had already gone, Bottas passed him 2 laps later and this is when Vettel had the massive lock up trying to defend from Bottas.

Bottas then drove away from Vettel at close to 3 seconds a lap, on lap 49 Vettel did a 1-35.029 and the next lap the tyre failed.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 6:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
mcdo wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
rivf1 wrote:
I wonder what went wrong with mercedes? they where way off the pace of the RB and Ferrari. We all know mercedes will qualify well due to that ridiculous Q3 mode they have but on race pace they where soundly beaten.


Bottas did so well with that ridiculous Q3 mode.....

The car just wasn't in the zone all weekend, pretty obvious to see. Took something pretty special from Lewis (and a lack of the faster red car in Q3) to take the pole, and he limited the damage in the race very well with a bit of help from Bottas (getting in front of Dan probably cost Dan 2nd, keeping Vettel behind for a lap or 2 arguably cost Vettel 3rd). Red Bull have clearly developed very well, and Ferrari look like they have made a gain with the new engine, wheras the new upgrades on Bottas' car didn't seem to help at all. Its a short week to get that right for Japan, though the track design may swing things back to Mercedes too.

I honestly believe his only competition in Q3 was Kimi Raikkonen. People are free to chalk that down as special if they want, it wasn't anything major for me. Pole wasn't a foregone conclusion but Kimi being Kimi helped

Do you use that comparitor everytime Vettel out qualifies Kimi?

How do you determine the perfomance of Vettel?

I typically don't consider it anything special when Vettel outqualifies Kimi either

Well at least you are consistent then.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 6:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 8:02 pm
Posts: 138
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think it would be as fair to say that Hamilton would not be leading the championship without Vettel's poor fortune as it was to say Rosberg would not be a WDC without Hamilton's poor fortune.

There honestly is no comparison.

I think there is. Bottom line is some bad luck is severely affecting a title run. Don't need to read anything more into it than that

Itemise Vettel's non fault bad luck

These last two races. He should have walked away with 50 points but he's ended up dropping 38 of them, with his main rival benefiting the most.


He also had a puncture at Silverstone and was hit at Montreal. And a VSC just after he pit sent him from heading for victory to fighting through the pack at China.

I agree with Pokerman that there’s no comparison to last year when Hamilton had one failure at Malaysia whilst already behind in the championship.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 6:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1781
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think it would be as fair to say that Hamilton would not be leading the championship without Vettel's poor fortune as it was to say Rosberg would not be a WDC without Hamilton's poor fortune.

There honestly is no comparison.

I think there is. Bottom line is some bad luck is severely affecting a title run. Don't need to read anything more into it than that

Itemise Vettel's non fault bad luck

These last two races. He should have walked away with 50 points but he's ended up dropping 38 of them, with his main rival benefiting the most.

Singapore was Vettel's fault.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 6:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2268
It's getting abit ridicolous now. People trying to compare Hamilton's 2016 reliability issues with Vettel this year by putting in racing incidents aswell. If we are getting like that we might aswell chuck in the Mercedes having clutch problems.
Vettels reliability problems are nothing compared to Hamilton's last year, I'm not even sure why it was brought up.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2268
optimisteprime wrote:

He also had a puncture at Silverstone and was hit at Montreal. And a VSC just after he pit sent him from heading for victory to fighting through the pack at China.

I agree with Pokerman that there’s no comparison to last year when Hamilton had one failure at Malaysia whilst already behind in the championship.


One failure? Comedy gold :lol:

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21091
GingerFurball wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
There honestly is no comparison.

I think there is. Bottom line is some bad luck is severely affecting a title run. Don't need to read anything more into it than that

Itemise Vettel's non fault bad luck

These last two races. He should have walked away with 50 points but he's ended up dropping 38 of them, with his main rival benefiting the most.

Singapore was Vettel's fault.

No I don't think it was


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:29 am
Posts: 1907
The last two races have been a shame really as the Ferrari could have been ultra competitive in both if not for the drivers positioning in one and engine reliability in the second. Maybe Lewis is getting some good karma for his team's comically bad mistakes in 2012. Either Lewis or Sebastian would be a worthy wdc this year, shame Seb/Ferrari is making it easy for Lewis at the death as both of these races could have been much more exciting with Ferraris in them at the sharp end.

_________________
Kimi: "Come on, get the McLaren out of the way!”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 11:41 am
Posts: 168
GingerFurball wrote:
Singapore was Vettel's fault.


Debatable. I personally thought it was a racing incident. However, it's arguable this was something within Vettel's control. He made the choice to start the race in that fashion, knowing the risks involved. Issues like Hamilton's Baku headrest problems and Austrian grid penalties, these kind of things are beyond a driver's control.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8774
F1_Ernie wrote:
optimisteprime wrote:

He also had a puncture at Silverstone and was hit at Montreal. And a VSC just after he pit sent him from heading for victory to fighting through the pack at China.

I agree with Pokerman that there’s no comparison to last year when Hamilton had one failure at Malaysia whilst already behind in the championship.


One failure? Comedy gold :lol:


I said it last year, wait until Vettel/Ferrari loses a title to reliability to see how opinions might change.

Hamilton lost 4 races to reliability last year. P20,P20 and a P10 start with an engine failure from P1. All whilst Rosberg lost nothing to bad luck all year.

Vettel has lost 1 and Hamilton lost one in Baku too. If Vettel is quickest in Japan and loses out because he needs a gearbox then its still nowhere near what Lewis suffered last year.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:21 pm
Posts: 5401
Flash2k11 wrote:
flyboy10 wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
No, I'm not. I'm explaining that it wouldn't be moved any easier by the marshals than with it, and pointing out that the car being left behind is liable to theft of vital components and information. I don't know whether Vettel consulted his team about what best to do, but I can imagine them preferring to accept a fine rather than suffer vital information getting into the wrong hands.

And perhaps the real reason is something else again.

Thanks for pointing out I like racing to be done according the rules; indeed I do.


Well, if the wheel did happen to mysteriously go for a walk, don't you think there would be hell to pay? And if its liable to happen, why has it not been reported once to have happened in the decades since we have had detachable wheels? I'm not buying that. And if the team told him to take it with him.... i'd say thats probably more suspicious than Vettel just deciding to do it off his own back. Not that I think anything massively untoward is going on either, just seems like another mental lapse at the end of a weekend where he wasn't just looking at a mangled car, but probably his mangled title hopes too. His giggling about it in the pen while being interviewed afterwards seemed to suggest his head wasn't really in the right place by then.

That should be "...off his own bat." It comes from cricket, i.e. scoring runs, 'off your own bat' rather than from extras or just running when the other batsman hits the ball.


The original expression certainly is, though the 'back' variant is a common phrasing of it.

Common but wrong and without logic to support its use any more than "a bowl in a china shop" or "from the gecko".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think it would be as fair to say that Hamilton would not be leading the championship without Vettel's poor fortune as it was to say Rosberg would not be a WDC without Hamilton's poor fortune.

There honestly is no comparison.

I think there is. Bottom line is some bad luck is severely affecting a title run. Don't need to read anything more into it than that

Itemise Vettel's non fault bad luck

These last two races. He should have walked away with 50 points but he's ended up dropping 38 of them, with his main rival benefiting the most.

He was partly responsible for what happened in Singapore so it can't be classed as none fault bad luck, if he hadn't moved across then there's no accident.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Just a coincidence that the tyre he had a massive lock up then failed?

He was doing a long stint on the tyres, towards the end of the race he complained he had lost all grip in the tyre and Ferrari left him out despite Vettel's lap times getting slower and slower, they didn't want to pit him because he would have lost positions and the tyre failed. That was a calculated risk that went wrong and nothing to do with unfortune on Vettel's part given that he helped to destroy the tyre.


It was not a "massive" lockup, others did even longer stints, it wasn't the only tyre that failed and Pirelli didn't chalk it up to the lockup.

So no, don't agree.

The tyre was finished but Ferrari left Vettel out, check his lap times he was going slower and slower and it was a massive lock up, he shortened the life of the tyre.


It was not a massive lockup ffs. Rewatch it. And the readings did not indicate that it was going to fail.

Keep ignoring the fact that Pirelli didn't chalk it up to the lockup :thumbup:

It looked quite big to me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0WHNqwDjXc

Also the tyre fell off quite drastically in performance long before the failure, Vettel complained about the tyre but you say that the Ferrari readings say the tyre was perfectly fine, hardly believable.

As I recall Pirelli never said the tyres were faulty on either of the Ferrari's and they failed for different reasons, a construction failure on Kimi's and Vettel's simply wore away, they did however attribute the problems to the aggressive suspension settings Ferrari used which loaded the tyres up too much.

I think it's fair to say that without the big lock up Vettel may well have been able to nurse the tyre to the end of the race.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
optimisteprime wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
There honestly is no comparison.

I think there is. Bottom line is some bad luck is severely affecting a title run. Don't need to read anything more into it than that

Itemise Vettel's non fault bad luck

These last two races. He should have walked away with 50 points but he's ended up dropping 38 of them, with his main rival benefiting the most.


He also had a puncture at Silverstone and was hit at Montreal. And a VSC just after he pit sent him from heading for victory to fighting through the pack at China.

I agree with Pokerman that there’s no comparison to last year when Hamilton had one failure at Malaysia whilst already behind in the championship.

I take it you are just being sarcastic?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
F1_Ernie wrote:
It's getting abit ridicolous now. People trying to compare Hamilton's 2016 reliability issues with Vettel this year by putting in racing incidents aswell. If we are getting like that we might aswell chuck in the Mercedes having clutch problems.
Vettels reliability problems are nothing compared to Hamilton's last year, I'm not even sure why it was brought up.

To discredit Hamilton if he wins the title.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
Zoue wrote:
GingerFurball wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I think there is. Bottom line is some bad luck is severely affecting a title run. Don't need to read anything more into it than that

Itemise Vettel's non fault bad luck

These last two races. He should have walked away with 50 points but he's ended up dropping 38 of them, with his main rival benefiting the most.

Singapore was Vettel's fault.

No I don't think it was

Vettel is not responsible for his own actions?

He steered towards Verstappen and Kimi which triggered the crash.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
lamo wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
optimisteprime wrote:

He also had a puncture at Silverstone and was hit at Montreal. And a VSC just after he pit sent him from heading for victory to fighting through the pack at China.

I agree with Pokerman that there’s no comparison to last year when Hamilton had one failure at Malaysia whilst already behind in the championship.


One failure? Comedy gold :lol:


I said it last year, wait until Vettel/Ferrari loses a title to reliability to see how opinions might change.

Hamilton lost 4 races to reliability last year. P20,P20 and a P10 start with an engine failure from P1. All whilst Rosberg lost nothing to bad luck all year.

Vettel has lost 1 and Hamilton lost one in Baku too. If Vettel is quickest in Japan and loses out because he needs a gearbox then its still nowhere near what Lewis suffered last year.

I believe someone even had a technical drawing explaining how Hamilton was destroying his engines. :)

Hamilton had 3 to 4 times the bad luck that Vettel has had this year but apart from basically Hamilton fans this was dismissed as nothing and Rosberg was the deserved winner, Vettel has a sniff of bad luck and everything is so unfair, has Vettel had an engine blow up whilst leading the race this year?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 1:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
One more thing I would say bout this race is that that was a beautiful battle between Daniel and Valtteri. Close and intense but always fair. That's the way drivers at this level should fight.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 3:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:21 pm
Posts: 5401
pokerman wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
It's getting abit ridicolous now. People trying to compare Hamilton's 2016 reliability issues with Vettel this year by putting in racing incidents aswell. If we are getting like that we might aswell chuck in the Mercedes having clutch problems.
Vettels reliability problems are nothing compared to Hamilton's last year, I'm not even sure why it was brought up.

To discredit Hamilton if he wins the title.

No, in an attempt to restore credibility to Rosberg's title among those who thought he was just lucky.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 8774
flyboy10 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
It's getting abit ridicolous now. People trying to compare Hamilton's 2016 reliability issues with Vettel this year by putting in racing incidents aswell. If we are getting like that we might aswell chuck in the Mercedes having clutch problems.
Vettels reliability problems are nothing compared to Hamilton's last year, I'm not even sure why it was brought up.

To discredit Hamilton if he wins the title.

No, in an attempt to restore credibility to Rosberg's title among those who thought he was just lucky.


Inter team reliability is down to pot luck though, even if the Ferrari has a lot more unreliability than the Mercedes then it would mean Mercedes just done a better job which isn't down to luck.

When you use the same engine one has 4 races he is taken out of contention of and the other has 0. That is quite a sizable amount of luck for it to swing that far in one direction.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21091
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
GingerFurball wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Itemise Vettel's non fault bad luck

These last two races. He should have walked away with 50 points but he's ended up dropping 38 of them, with his main rival benefiting the most.

Singapore was Vettel's fault.

No I don't think it was

Vettel is not responsible for his own actions?

He steered towards Verstappen and Kimi which triggered the crash.

Kimi and Max came together and collected Vettel. I don't think it was his fault. It was an unfortunate racing incident in my view. Unlucky for Vettel that it happened at a circuit where he stood an excellent chance of winning


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21091
flyboy10 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
It's getting abit ridicolous now. People trying to compare Hamilton's 2016 reliability issues with Vettel this year by putting in racing incidents aswell. If we are getting like that we might aswell chuck in the Mercedes having clutch problems.
Vettels reliability problems are nothing compared to Hamilton's last year, I'm not even sure why it was brought up.

To discredit Hamilton if he wins the title.

No, in an attempt to restore credibility to Rosberg's title among those who thought he was just lucky.

I don't see the big deal and why people are being so precious about it, myself. The reference was clearly made to illustrate how both got a big dose of bad luck while in the hunt for the title. It's a ridiculous thing to get up in arms about


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21091
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Just a coincidence that the tyre he had a massive lock up then failed?

He was doing a long stint on the tyres, towards the end of the race he complained he had lost all grip in the tyre and Ferrari left him out despite Vettel's lap times getting slower and slower, they didn't want to pit him because he would have lost positions and the tyre failed. That was a calculated risk that went wrong and nothing to do with unfortune on Vettel's part given that he helped to destroy the tyre.


It was not a "massive" lockup, others did even longer stints, it wasn't the only tyre that failed and Pirelli didn't chalk it up to the lockup.

So no, don't agree.

The tyre was finished but Ferrari left Vettel out, check his lap times he was going slower and slower and it was a massive lock up, he shortened the life of the tyre.


It was not a massive lockup ffs. Rewatch it. And the readings did not indicate that it was going to fail.

Keep ignoring the fact that Pirelli didn't chalk it up to the lockup :thumbup:

It looked quite big to me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0WHNqwDjXc

Also the tyre fell off quite drastically in performance long before the failure, Vettel complained about the tyre but you say that the Ferrari readings say the tyre was perfectly fine, hardly believable.

As I recall Pirelli never said the tyres were faulty on either of the Ferrari's and they failed for different reasons, a construction failure on Kimi's and Vettel's simply wore away, they did however attribute the problems to the aggressive suspension settings Ferrari used which loaded the tyres up too much.

I think it's fair to say that without the big lock up Vettel may well have been able to nurse the tyre to the end of the race.

I don't think it's fair to say that at all. You have zero information to base that on.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10826
^^ this above. Also, the side view of that lockup didn't look as harsh as this head-on view. Tyre actually didn't block for that long, pretty brief and it came back to rolling state quite fast.

Bottas had a MUCH harsher lockup in Russia, for example.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 6901
Location: Belgium
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
GingerFurball wrote:
Zoue wrote:
These last two races. He should have walked away with 50 points but he's ended up dropping 38 of them, with his main rival benefiting the most.

Singapore was Vettel's fault.

No I don't think it was

Vettel is not responsible for his own actions?

He steered towards Verstappen and Kimi which triggered the crash.

There's a thread on that crash, in which the whole sequence was looked at. Saying only Vettel's movement triggered the crash is an oversimplification. Verstappen inviting Räikkönen to overtake on the left, in effect getting himself squeezed in a pincer, is at least as great a factor in what happened.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 1:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
sandman1347 wrote:
One more thing I would say bout this race is that that was a beautiful battle between Daniel and Valtteri. Close and intense but always fair. That's the way drivers at this level should fight.

Yes I noticed that as well.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 1:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
flyboy10 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
It's getting abit ridicolous now. People trying to compare Hamilton's 2016 reliability issues with Vettel this year by putting in racing incidents aswell. If we are getting like that we might aswell chuck in the Mercedes having clutch problems.
Vettels reliability problems are nothing compared to Hamilton's last year, I'm not even sure why it was brought up.

To discredit Hamilton if he wins the title.

No, in an attempt to restore credibility to Rosberg's title among those who thought he was just lucky.

It was a poor attempt then.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 1:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
GingerFurball wrote:
Zoue wrote:
These last two races. He should have walked away with 50 points but he's ended up dropping 38 of them, with his main rival benefiting the most.

Singapore was Vettel's fault.

No I don't think it was

Vettel is not responsible for his own actions?

He steered towards Verstappen and Kimi which triggered the crash.

Kimi and Max came together and collected Vettel. I don't think it was his fault. It was an unfortunate racing incident in my view. Unlucky for Vettel that it happened at a circuit where he stood an excellent chance of winning

Vettel triggered the crash by the action he took, he basically forced Verstappen into Kimi's car, it was a racing accident but not none fault bad luck equivalent let's say to an engine blowing up.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 1:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
Zoue wrote:
flyboy10 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
It's getting abit ridicolous now. People trying to compare Hamilton's 2016 reliability issues with Vettel this year by putting in racing incidents aswell. If we are getting like that we might aswell chuck in the Mercedes having clutch problems.
Vettels reliability problems are nothing compared to Hamilton's last year, I'm not even sure why it was brought up.

To discredit Hamilton if he wins the title.

No, in an attempt to restore credibility to Rosberg's title among those who thought he was just lucky.

I don't see the big deal and why people are being so precious about it, myself. The reference was clearly made to illustrate how both got a big dose of bad luck while in the hunt for the title. It's a ridiculous thing to get up in arms about

No it was said that if Hamilton wins the title then he's been lucky, which is short hand for saying it will be undeserved.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 1:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
It was not a "massive" lockup, others did even longer stints, it wasn't the only tyre that failed and Pirelli didn't chalk it up to the lockup.

So no, don't agree.

The tyre was finished but Ferrari left Vettel out, check his lap times he was going slower and slower and it was a massive lock up, he shortened the life of the tyre.


It was not a massive lockup ffs. Rewatch it. And the readings did not indicate that it was going to fail.

Keep ignoring the fact that Pirelli didn't chalk it up to the lockup :thumbup:

It looked quite big to me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0WHNqwDjXc

Also the tyre fell off quite drastically in performance long before the failure, Vettel complained about the tyre but you say that the Ferrari readings say the tyre was perfectly fine, hardly believable.

As I recall Pirelli never said the tyres were faulty on either of the Ferrari's and they failed for different reasons, a construction failure on Kimi's and Vettel's simply wore away, they did however attribute the problems to the aggressive suspension settings Ferrari used which loaded the tyres up too much.

I think it's fair to say that without the big lock up Vettel may well have been able to nurse the tyre to the end of the race.

I don't think it's fair to say that at all. You have zero information to base that on.

It certainly didn't help plus they knew the tyre needed changing but they gambled, that's not pot luck bad luck.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 1:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
mds wrote:
^^ this above. Also, the side view of that lockup didn't look as harsh as this head-on view. Tyre actually didn't block for that long, pretty brief and it came back to rolling state quite fast.

Bottas had a MUCH harsher lockup in Russia, for example.

Which he had to change straight away.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 1:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24065
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
GingerFurball wrote:
Zoue wrote:
These last two races. He should have walked away with 50 points but he's ended up dropping 38 of them, with his main rival benefiting the most.

Singapore was Vettel's fault.

No I don't think it was

Vettel is not responsible for his own actions?

He steered towards Verstappen and Kimi which triggered the crash.

There's a thread on that crash, in which the whole sequence was looked at. Saying only Vettel's movement triggered the crash is an oversimplification. Verstappen inviting Räikkönen to overtake on the left, in effect getting himself squeezed in a pincer, is at least as great a factor in what happened.

Yes indeed but still Vettel's aggressive action triggered the crash, he drives in a straight line then there's no crash, there came a point when neither Verstappen or Kimi could change the outcome.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 7:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21091
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:


The tyre was finished but Ferrari left Vettel out, check his lap times he was going slower and slower and it was a massive lock up, he shortened the life of the tyre.


It was not a massive lockup ffs. Rewatch it. And the readings did not indicate that it was going to fail.

Keep ignoring the fact that Pirelli didn't chalk it up to the lockup :thumbup:

It looked quite big to me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0WHNqwDjXc

Also the tyre fell off quite drastically in performance long before the failure, Vettel complained about the tyre but you say that the Ferrari readings say the tyre was perfectly fine, hardly believable.

As I recall Pirelli never said the tyres were faulty on either of the Ferrari's and they failed for different reasons, a construction failure on Kimi's and Vettel's simply wore away, they did however attribute the problems to the aggressive suspension settings Ferrari used which loaded the tyres up too much.

I think it's fair to say that without the big lock up Vettel may well have been able to nurse the tyre to the end of the race.

I don't think it's fair to say that at all. You have zero information to base that on.

It certainly didn't help plus they knew the tyre needed changing but they gambled, that's not pot luck bad luck.

still guessing. Pirelli didn't say that lockup contributed in any way, did they?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 7:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21091
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
flyboy10 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
It's getting abit ridicolous now. People trying to compare Hamilton's 2016 reliability issues with Vettel this year by putting in racing incidents aswell. If we are getting like that we might aswell chuck in the Mercedes having clutch problems.
Vettels reliability problems are nothing compared to Hamilton's last year, I'm not even sure why it was brought up.

To discredit Hamilton if he wins the title.

No, in an attempt to restore credibility to Rosberg's title among those who thought he was just lucky.

I don't see the big deal and why people are being so precious about it, myself. The reference was clearly made to illustrate how both got a big dose of bad luck while in the hunt for the title. It's a ridiculous thing to get up in arms about

No it was said that if Hamilton wins the title then he's been lucky, which is short hand for saying it will be undeserved.

I don't recall you having a problem saying that about Rosberg. It's not the point being made, but the drivers involved then, clearly


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 8:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 5277
Location: Mumbai, India
Image
Source - http://www.planetf1.com

Name the missing drivers!

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 8:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 702
Location: UK
Vettel is not there but who else?.....from that pic it does seem Max and Lewis are quite at ease with each other.


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: bonecrasher, Google Adsense [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