planetf1.com

It is currently Mon May 21, 2018 6:57 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:00 pm 
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mas wrote:
http://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/871878/Kimi-Raikkonen-fastest-drive-Lewis-Hamilton-better-Marc-Priestley-F1-news

But the 2007 season, when Priestley was able to work with both Alonso and Hamilton in the same team, ended in disaster: “That year when we had by far the best car, by far the two best drivers in the world and both championships should have been ours.They were there for the taking and in the end we missed out on them both. ”

Ferrari won half the races on merit, not McLaren dropping the ball, how can you have the 2 best drivers and the best car but lose half of the races on pure performance, it's a nonsense.

Rosberg got more than 50% more poles than Hamilton in 2014, despite being the clearly inferior driver. Qualifying is as much about pure performance as anything else. You going to credit that to the car, too?

McLaren imploded somewhat in 2007, in case it escaped your notice. The whole point about dropping the ball is that they didn't get the results they should have done, so how can you point to the results as evidence of what they might have achieved?


What does that post have to do with anything what was being spoken about. Rosberg and Hamilton had the same car in 2014.

You often dispute Ferrari being the better car but never mention the drivers - who was the quickest driver in 2007?

Well, if you actually read the post you'd understand that I was saying a faster driver being beaten isn't necessarily proof they had a worse car


But you just chose one fragment of racing, qualifying. Hamilton was faster overall still in 2014. So I don't really see your point. Ferrari won half the races in 2007 and if its driver were better in the wet it would have won 2 more too.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
For starters? Are you suggesting there are more?

Kimi was gifted the win in Brazil but it was from the other Ferrari.
He was also gifted the win in Australia, again from the other Ferrari.

China, he had already overtaken Hamilton on track for the lead of the race and given that he had made his inters last longer had gained track position and strategy advantage over Hamilton.

Nobody else won more than 4 races.

So? He still wouldn't and shouldn't have come anywhere near the title. It was the McLaren drivers to lose and they lost it big time. The title should have been wrapped up with a race to spare.

Aside from the initial race, no Ferrari driver led the Championship at any stage of the year, until the season finale. After the European Grand Prix, Kimi was nearly two full wins behind Hamilton and not much further short of that from Alonso. In fact, he was still nearly two full race wins behind after the Italian Grand Prix, with only four races to go. Lewis only needed four more points after Japan, equivalent to two 7th place finishes, and it wouldn't have mattered what Kimi did. If the McLaren boys hadn't imploded at the end it would have been a walk in the park, so let's not pretend that they were somehow valiantly fighting back against the odds. Kimi shouldn't have won that title, but that had nothing to do with how good his car was

Kimi winning the title had nothing to do with how good his car was?

You have basically read nothing that other posters have written, either Alonso or Hamilton would have won quite easily in Kimi's car.

You would know this how, exactly?

I have read them, but I don't necessarily agree with them. You do understand the difference, I take it?

Kimi did have a good car, but him winning the title was down to the McLaren boys throwing it away. The McLaren drivers could have won quite easily in the McLaren. The fact they didn't is down to them and not because they were battling the odds.

Of course you don't agree.

What, I have to now?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Ferrari won half the races on merit, not McLaren dropping the ball, how can you have the 2 best drivers and the best car but lose half of the races on pure performance, it's a nonsense.

Rosberg got more than 50% more poles than Hamilton in 2014, despite being the clearly inferior driver. Qualifying is as much about pure performance as anything else. You going to credit that to the car, too?

McLaren imploded somewhat in 2007, in case it escaped your notice. The whole point about dropping the ball is that they didn't get the results they should have done, so how can you point to the results as evidence of what they might have achieved?


What does that post have to do with anything what was being spoken about. Rosberg and Hamilton had the same car in 2014.

You often dispute Ferrari being the better car but never mention the drivers - who was the quickest driver in 2007?

Well, if you actually read the post you'd understand that I was saying a faster driver being beaten isn't necessarily proof they had a worse car


But you just chose one fragment of racing, qualifying. Hamilton was faster overall still in 2014. So I don't really see your point. Ferrari won half the races in 2007 and if its driver were better in the wet it would have won 2 more too.

i take it you understand the concept of an example? It's just to show that performance isn't only about the car


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
It's irrelevant. The fact is that Hamilton should have won with a race to spare and should have beaten Kimi by at least a race win's worth of points. The fact that he didn't was a gift to Ferrari.

It's not irrelevant to the Ferrari being the faster car in the races where you said that they were gifted wins.

no, I said they were gifted the title

No you said that Ferrari were gifted the last 2 wins of the season.

No, I said they were gifted the title. I pointed to the last two races as an example of that. It was your choice to interpret that as wins.

I said that Kimi won more races than any other driver and you said he was gifted some wins like the last 2 races of the season.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mas wrote:
http://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/871878/Kimi-Raikkonen-fastest-drive-Lewis-Hamilton-better-Marc-Priestley-F1-news

But the 2007 season, when Priestley was able to work with both Alonso and Hamilton in the same team, ended in disaster: “That year when we had by far the best car, by far the two best drivers in the world and both championships should have been ours.They were there for the taking and in the end we missed out on them both. ”

Ferrari won half the races on merit, not McLaren dropping the ball, how can you have the 2 best drivers and the best car but lose half of the races on pure performance, it's a nonsense.

Rosberg got more than 50% more poles than Hamilton in 2014, despite being the clearly inferior driver. Qualifying is as much about pure performance as anything else. You going to credit that to the car, too?

McLaren imploded somewhat in 2007, in case it escaped your notice. The whole point about dropping the ball is that they didn't get the results they should have done, so how can you point to the results as evidence of what they might have achieved?

Ferrari won 9 out of 17 races on pure performance with 2 inferior drivers, the Ferrari was the fastest car, I put it that they dropped far more points because of reliability issues plus the drivers not being as good.

Again, we're back to understanding what dropping the ball means


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
It's not irrelevant to the Ferrari being the faster car in the races where you said that they were gifted wins.

no, I said they were gifted the title

No you said that Ferrari were gifted the last 2 wins of the season.

No, I said they were gifted the title. I pointed to the last two races as an example of that. It was your choice to interpret that as wins.

I said that Kimi won more races than any other driver and you said he was gifted some wins like the last 2 races of the season.

I said he was gifted the title.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Ferrari won half the races on merit, not McLaren dropping the ball, how can you have the 2 best drivers and the best car but lose half of the races on pure performance, it's a nonsense.

Rosberg got more than 50% more poles than Hamilton in 2014, despite being the clearly inferior driver. Qualifying is as much about pure performance as anything else. You going to credit that to the car, too?

McLaren imploded somewhat in 2007, in case it escaped your notice. The whole point about dropping the ball is that they didn't get the results they should have done, so how can you point to the results as evidence of what they might have achieved?


What does that post have to do with anything what was being spoken about. Rosberg and Hamilton had the same car in 2014.

You often dispute Ferrari being the better car but never mention the drivers - who was the quickest driver in 2007?

Well, if you actually read the post you'd understand that I was saying a faster driver being beaten isn't necessarily proof they had a worse car


But you just chose one fragment of racing, qualifying. Hamilton was faster overall still in 2014. So I don't really see your point. Ferrari won half the races in 2007 and if its driver were better in the wet it would have won 2 more too.

They actually won more races than McLaren and not 1 race was gifted, at Ferrari neither Massa or Kimi have won a race alongside Alonso and Vettel despite them both having won several races.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:10 pm 
Did Vettel/Ferrari gift Hamilton the title this year too?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
pokerman wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Rosberg got more than 50% more poles than Hamilton in 2014, despite being the clearly inferior driver. Qualifying is as much about pure performance as anything else. You going to credit that to the car, too?

McLaren imploded somewhat in 2007, in case it escaped your notice. The whole point about dropping the ball is that they didn't get the results they should have done, so how can you point to the results as evidence of what they might have achieved?


What does that post have to do with anything what was being spoken about. Rosberg and Hamilton had the same car in 2014.

You often dispute Ferrari being the better car but never mention the drivers - who was the quickest driver in 2007?

Well, if you actually read the post you'd understand that I was saying a faster driver being beaten isn't necessarily proof they had a worse car


But you just chose one fragment of racing, qualifying. Hamilton was faster overall still in 2014. So I don't really see your point. Ferrari won half the races in 2007 and if its driver were better in the wet it would have won 2 more too.

They actually won more races than McLaren and not 1 race was gifted, at Ferrari neither Massa or Kimi have won a race alongside Alonso and Vettel despite them both having won several races.

In Spain Massa out-qualified Alonso by 3 hundredths of a second. Are you seriously saying it would have been impossible for Alonso to do better? At the first corner, Alonso went off into the gravel, but for you this was optimum performance?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
lamo wrote:
Did Vettel/Ferrari gift Hamilton the title this year too?

Why? Is this year identical to 2007 for some reason?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:16 pm 
Zoue wrote:
I take it you understand the concept of an example? It's just to show that performance isn't only about the car

Bad ones are harder to catch


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I take it you understand the concept of an example? It's just to show that performance isn't only about the car

Bad ones are harder to catch

yes, and poor reading comprehension doesn't help, either


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:22 pm 
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Did Vettel/Ferrari gift Hamilton the title this year too?

Why? Is this year identical to 2007 for some reason?


They are similar, a driver in a slower car fighting for the title against a driver with a faster car until a driver error and mechanical issue ruining their title bid in consecutive races at the end of the year.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:23 pm 
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I take it you understand the concept of an example? It's just to show that performance isn't only about the car

Bad ones are harder to catch

yes, and poor reading comprehension doesn't help, either


Getting quite personal in this one aren't you? Why don't you stick to the content of the debate?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 8:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I take it you understand the concept of an example? It's just to show that performance isn't only about the car

Bad ones are harder to catch

yes, and poor reading comprehension doesn't help, either


Getting quite personal in this one aren't you? Why don't you stick to the content of the debate?

you started it, fella. Look in the mirror


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 8:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Did Vettel/Ferrari gift Hamilton the title this year too?

Why? Is this year identical to 2007 for some reason?


They are similar, a driver in a slower car fighting for the title against a driver with a faster car until a driver error and mechanical issue ruining their title bid in consecutive races at the end of the year.

They're not similar at all


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 9:13 pm 
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I take it you understand the concept of an example? It's just to show that performance isn't only about the car

Bad ones are harder to catch

yes, and poor reading comprehension doesn't help, either


Getting quite personal in this one aren't you? Why don't you stick to the content of the debate?

you started it, fella. Look in the mirror



Where?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 9:13 pm 
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Did Vettel/Ferrari gift Hamilton the title this year too?

Why? Is this year identical to 2007 for some reason?


They are similar, a driver in a slower car fighting for the title against a driver with a faster car until a driver error and mechanical issue ruining their title bid in consecutive races at the end of the year.

They're not similar at all


It was close, but the Ferrari/Vettel implosion was significantly bigger


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 9:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Did Vettel/Ferrari gift Hamilton the title this year too?

Why? Is this year identical to 2007 for some reason?


They are similar, a driver in a slower car fighting for the title against a driver with a faster car until a driver error and mechanical issue ruining their title bid in consecutive races at the end of the year.

They're not similar at all


It was close, but the Ferrari/Vettel implosion was significantly bigger

if you say so. I think they are two completely separate things, myself. I don't get this need to make comparisons all the time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 9:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 22140
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
Bad ones are harder to catch

yes, and poor reading comprehension doesn't help, either


Getting quite personal in this one aren't you? Why don't you stick to the content of the debate?

you started it, fella. Look in the mirror



Where?

you're going on about bad examples, when it's pretty clear what I meant. Which only leaves comprehension?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 9:55 pm 
So who was the quickest driver in 2007?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 9:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:48 pm
Posts: 324
If Hamilton was the no1 driver, as Shumacher would have been, Hamilton would have won no doubt.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 10:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:29 am
Posts: 1919
lamo wrote:
So who was the quickest driver in 2007?

At the time I thought Hamilton followed by Alonso, Raikonnen, Massa and hindsight has only confirmed this in my mind. However Alonso was very close and the Ferrari was the slightly better car which is why the championship was so close to the end.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 10:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:48 pm
Posts: 324
It's just too bad Shumacher didn't stay that year, since we never got to see him and Hamilton, the two best drivers of all time, compete against each other. He's probably lucky he quit though, I mean how embarassing for him would it have been to get beaten by a rookie?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 5801
Ocon wrote:
It's just too bad Shumacher didn't stay that year, since we never got to see him and Hamilton, the two best drivers of all time, compete against each other. He's probably lucky he quit though, I mean how embarassing for him would it have been to get beaten by a rookie?

More embarrassing than the much younger reigning champion being beaten by the said rookie? I don't think so


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:26 pm 
Hamilton did race Schumacher in 2010-2012...

As long as Schumacher remained to beat Massa be 0.350-0.450 then that’s all that matters. Alonso is the one tested by a rookie in the same car.

On outright speed, Massa was quicker than Raikkonen in 2007 too. He just made more errors and had worse luck. In just the dry races Massa comes out clearly quicker, Kimi did beat Massa in both the wet races though.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 2:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:02 am
Posts: 693
Location: India
Ferrari did not inform MS when they approached Kimi and signed him. So in a way he was forced to retire or just fight with Kimi on equal status. 2008 was a great opportunity for Ferrari to win the title again. They decide to change the car on MS advice to help Massa. Kimi had won first 2 of the 4 races and he usually perform better in second half.

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YM9-GK3MeLI


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 2:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
lamo wrote:
Zoue wrote:
lamo wrote:
What does that post have to do with anything what was being spoken about. Rosberg and Hamilton had the same car in 2014.

You often dispute Ferrari being the better car but never mention the drivers - who was the quickest driver in 2007?

Well, if you actually read the post you'd understand that I was saying a faster driver being beaten isn't necessarily proof they had a worse car


But you just chose one fragment of racing, qualifying. Hamilton was faster overall still in 2014. So I don't really see your point. Ferrari won half the races in 2007 and if its driver were better in the wet it would have won 2 more too.

They actually won more races than McLaren and not 1 race was gifted, at Ferrari neither Massa or Kimi have won a race alongside Alonso and Vettel despite them both having won several races.

In Spain Massa out-qualified Alonso by 3 hundredths of a second. Are you seriously saying it would have been impossible for Alonso to do better? At the first corner, Alonso went off into the gravel, but for you this was optimum performance?

You want to give the McLaren theoretically more speed?

Ferrari qualifying on pole and winning the race 6 seconds in front of Hamilton is not a gifted win.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 2:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 25286
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Ferrari did not inform MS when they approached Kimi and signed him. So in a way he was forced to retire or just fight with Kimi on equal status. 2008 was a great opportunity for Ferrari to win the title again. They decide to change the car on MS advice to help Massa. Kimi had won first 2 of the 4 races and he usually perform better in second half.

Schumacher made a massive mistake, he would have lost his #1 status going into the season but would have thrashed Kimi, but this thing about protecting his status and not damaging his WDC chances seemed to be first priority, and not getting beat in the same car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 9th

Win: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podium: 2nd Barcelona 2018 and Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 3:03 pm 
Zoue wrote:
In Spain Massa out-qualified Alonso by 3 hundredths of a second. Are you seriously saying it would have been impossible for Alonso to do better? At the first corner, Alonso went off into the gravel, but for you this was optimum performance?


Schumacher out qualified Massa by 0.5 the year before - do you think it would have been possible for Schumacher to do better?

Massa was 3-1 down in qualifying to his team mate at Spainish GPs going into 2007. His overall record is 11-4 down in qualifying against his team mates. He beat Kimi x2, Stroll and JV. Alonso and Bottas whitewashed him there.

Alonso is 16-1 up in qualifying against his team mate in Spain, I believe his best record at any track? Has he whitewashed team mates at any track on the calendar?

I would think there was a lot more time left in the Ferrari than the Mclaren, woudn't you?


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

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], minchy 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