planetf1.com

Nope. You’re the one dumping on the idea that it’s anything other than the Merc drivers being better, saying “here come the excuses,” for example

I believe Kimi might have challenged for pole on his very last lap, but I dont think it was simply a case of having new tires. The track was slightly improving with every passing minute, and Kimi started his last flying lap right on the 10 second countdown, about a full minute after Vettel, Ham, and Bottas had done so. Basically, Kimi having a chance to get pole, had more to do with the slightly improving track conditions than Ferrari being faster in the wet.

I see, and in what way did I rule out alternative view points? I see you attempting to put words in my mouth but I didn't actually say those words so once again we're back to that same old issue aren't we Zoue?

I think the big question here is whether or not Raikkonen will ever actually nail a Q3 lap this season

It wasn’t track improvement IMO. It was driver experience of the conditions. The lap time Kimi set that beat Vettel was set over 5 minutes before for example and on more used rubber.

By dismissing alternatives as excuses

Sandman, in fairness Kimi didn't think that Ferrari was magically slow in the wet, however himself said amongst other things for Q3 that:

"I was pleasantly surprised with how nice the car was on the wets, because that has definitely not been our strong point lately"

So yes he could potentially have put the car in pole in Q3 (again not a given, but if he thought so then I am happy to accept it), but this would have been a surprise. The Merc definitely looked better in the wet in the last two races, I am not sure what the argument is. It is not about excuses for Ferrari

In Germany it wasnt full wet conditions. Hamilton was on the best tyres, not much of a comparison can be made.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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

You are again putting words in my mouth. I didn't dismiss anything. You and the usual group started saying that the Mercedes was better in the wet and that that's why Ferrari didn't take pole. I was simply showing that the Ferrari was perfectly capable of taking pole and that they simply failed to do so (which their own driver as well as the times indicate quite clearly). You are the ones making the assertion that the Mercedes is better in the wet - your only evidence being that they had a better Q3.

Point taken.

Based on what? There were never actual wet conditions in Germany that required an intermediate or wet tire. They were driving with slicks on a damp track so there's no real example there. In Hungary, Ferrari were quicker in qualifying until the very end when they failed to improve with the new set of tires due to traffic. Honestly to make that claim as though it's indisputable is just ridiculous.

As I said above, point taken for Germany. We had only one full wet race so far.

What is a ridiculous point? You can see that both Ferrari drivers and the Mercedes boss were saying the same thing. Kimi said it in the very article that you quoted, that they were not as strong and it was a surprise, but you seem to have missed this. Why are you so defensive about this? Yes they could have taken pole, but this doesn't mean that they were the strongest in the wet. It was a surprise, this is why Kimi was so annoyed, that in Q3 everything suddenly (and unexpectedly as it sounds) came together, but unfortunately he couldn't have that last lap.

And who are the usual group? This sounds as if you think there are people after you or something.

Wow, this gets annoying fast...No I'm not defensive, I'm pointing out the obvious; that Ferrari were on for the pole all weekend until it mattered most (at the end of Q3). You are the one claiming that the Ferrari somehow loses it's pace relative to the Merc in wet conditions. This despite the data traces showing the same gains on the straights even in wet conditions. It reminds me of similar claims made in 2008; that the Ferrari was worse in the wet. In actuality, it was just the drivers who performed worse in the wet and I think that's the case here as well. If you disagree, that's fine.

For sure Vettel didnt have a good qualifying session. IMO, the telling factor that track was improving, was that most (if not all) the drivers improved by a considerable margin (6 tenths minimum according to the lap charts) on the 2nd try.
I remember thinking at the time that whoever completes his flying lap last, will have a better chance at the pole.

1. The track does contain lots of corners too, not only straits.
2. The GPS's or the speed traps would also have the 2010 - 2013 Red Bull down on Ferrari and Mercedes on the overwhelming majority of the races, but that does not mean that Red Bull was not the best race car.
3. If you dont make an allowance of the possibility that different conditions may sweet different cars or different chassis, then maybe you also dont make any allowance to much spoken claim that Mercedes of the last few years had trouble following on the dirty air, and probably it was just their drivers being useless when it comes to overtaking!

What is the source of your annoyance? This is a conversation, even if you started calling people disagreeing with you "a group".

Ferrari was on for the pole all weekend? Vettel led Q1 on a drying track (Ferrari faster on the dry, no surprise here), led Q2 by having a great call for intermediates and setting the time he did when the others were on the wrong tyre (so no much comparison there) and then Q3, well we've talked about that.

You are basically saying that the Ferrari was the better car in all conditions and their drivers messed it up, while what Zoue said was that it feels weird that both drivers did worse than the Mercs, it points to the car being worse in the wet. Just as the Merc was unstable in the dry (as claimed by Hamilton and seen spinning in FP).

So is it a driver or a car issue? For what it's worth, Toto said that the Merc had a small advantage on the wets, while Ferrari is faster in the dry and inters. Take it as you want, it is a debate after all and not worth being upset about.

The conditions were very stable. It continued to rain throughout all of Q3.

In stable conditions the times usually tumble by up to seconds per lap as the drivers learn were they can push a little further. The same as the last qualifying we had in Monza and what happens in races when it suddenly rains too.

The situation you are describing is more a drying track.

What's taking them so long? Why the constant moving of deadlines? Is Ricciardo even going to sign with Red Bull? It's very strange how long it's taking them.

I imagine the sudden turn in the Force India situation is causing people further down the chain to hold fire, could be a lot of domino's about to fall.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2018: {Rookie Year}
Final positon: 1st | 3 Podiums | 2 Wins
2018 Pick 10 Champion

I thought it was pretty close again in the wet. The Mercedes looked planted but Kimi obviously felt Lewis's time was achievable or he wouldn't have said it. Though I do think looking at Kimi's earlier run where he went 4ths up is a bit misleading as the track obviously improved between those times as Sainz went nearly 4ths up on Bottas himself just after Kimi did. I think the only time Lewis didn't set the fastest lap was when it was his own time he didn't match and Bottas was there in the ballpark throughout so the Merc was obviously hooked up too.

I just don't think you'll get two different cars being this close very often. There just doesn't seem to be much in it whatever the weather and track. Ferrari have the advantage on the straights now but Mercedes in the twisty bits.

It's a great battle but a shame Red Bull have fallen back for one reason or another.

_________________
"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

so saying “here come the excuses” is simply your way of showing that Ferrari was perfectly capable of taking pole? Please. I’d already said in the post directly preceding that it wasn’t impossible for Ferrari to have gotten pole anyway. Dismissing alternative theories as excuses is not showing anything except an unwillingness to consider different viewpoints.

As to their own driver saying he was capable of getting pole, well Merc’s own TP claimed his car was better in the wet. So how do you determine which one is believeable evidence and which one is delusion? Quoting a driver isn’t the slam dunk you think it is.

I’ve stated I believe either scenario is a possibility and that there’s insufficient evidence to state conclusively one way or the other. . I’ve yet to see you acknowledge anything other than your own point of view

I don't disagree with you, but Sainz's quick lap was his 4th timed lap whilst everybody else at that point had posted 3 timed lap. In those initial runs most drivers were finding 0.5 at least per lap with growing confidence and experience of the track.

Interestingly Sainz never improved on the further 2 laps he did though. Maybe he took the best out of the tyres by that point, errors or was even held up.

In Q3 of Hungary, Mercedes was fast on every lap they did. Ferrari struggled a lot more to get the extreme wets in the right operating window. Mercedes were fastest all throughout Q3 until Raikkonen managed a very good lap when the Mercedes drivers were already in the pits.

Maybe Ferrari did have as much ultimate pace as Mercedes in Q3 but it clearly was the harder car to drive. Toto Wolff, both Ferrari drivers and Martin Brundle all echoed the same thing.

In that above article, Wolff doesn't specifically state Merc have the best car in the wet. Instead, he states Merc have the best team. So, perhaps he thinks his drivers make the difference?

"The difference today was made by the human factors, not the machine . We saw the storms popping up and we reacted in the right way. Then it all came down to one lap on the wet tyres, and both Lewis and Valtteri nailed it.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/formula-1/2 ... t-updates/

When did Toto Wolf say that?

Who exactly is upset? Are you Dr. Phil now or something? You seem to think that when someone disagrees with you, they must be angry for some reason.

Anyway, all things being equal, the pecking order doesn't change with the weather. The fastest CAR in the dry will almost always be the fastest CAR in the wet. There are exceptions sometimes but that is generally the case. Ferrari were clearly the fastest car in the dry and, up to the last tire change, they were the fastest car in the wet. They just needed to execute that last lap on the fresh tires but they didn't. Simply observing the fact that the Ferraris qualified slower doesn't prove that they had the slower car. Not when the abundance of evidence suggests that they clearly had the faster car. Ask yourself; did the team get in a good lap at the end of Q3? If the answer is no, why are you blaming the car?

Bottas vs Massa in the rain during their time together at Williams

Australia 2014 qualifying: Massa

Malaysia 2014 qualifying: Massa

Japan 2014 race day: Massa

Malaysia 2015 qualifying: Massa

Britain 2015 race day: Massa

USA 2015 qualifying: Massa

Monaco 2016 race: Massa

Britain 2016 race: Massa

Now Bottas is in a Mercedes and he’s on the front row and two tenths away from pole position. That probably shows you something.

In the full wet, we had a pace advantage

https://streamable.com/30jkr

Let’s be honest, it’s pretty obvious he’s talking about the car.

This is what you're talking about? This clip you linked here? He's talking about the times they were doing. He says absolutely nothing regarding car vs. driver.

Tbh I'm amazed Bottas was 2 tenths off Hamilton in a wet quali, maybe Bottas put in the lap of his life. Now we are all just waiting for Kimi to not muck up a Q3.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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

Sandman, in your previous posts on this page you can’t even seem to accept that Mercedes consistently looked quicker than Ferrari throughout Q3 apart from when Raikkonen and Sainz did a fourth run.

Bottas was consistently slower than Massa in the rain when they were teammates, so it’s rather unlikely that the difference was the drivers.

I did think -0.250 on Bottas was a little underwhelming from Hamilton. I don't know if he made a mistake or was too cautious but I think Hamilton was 0.4 quicker in S3 and 0.2 quicker in S1 so slower in S2. Did they do a side by side qualifying lap thing with the gap indicator for this qualifying?

That is a good point, Bottas is nothing special in the wet at all. There are a few missing there just at a glance, Spa 2014 qualifying (Bottas ahead) and Brazil 2016 race day (Bottas ahead). Bottas also finished ahead of Massa in Japan 2014 too (you have that wrong). 2016 Hungarian Grand prix qualifying, Bottas ahead too as well as 2016 Austrian GP qualifying.

Another one, 2014 British grand prix qualifying Bottas was ahead too. Bottas isn't great in the wet but that initial list was pretty biased, missing one or two is acceptable as error but you left out at least 6 Bottas aheads. You made it look like a landslide, when I think it is 7-6 in Massa's favour?

Does anybody know when Mercedes will bring the spec 3 engine?

I called it after Silverstone, I said lets wait and see how Bottas treats Vettel the next time they go wheel to wheel. I am speculating that Toto told him, you have our blessing to make life as hard as possible for Vettel (legally) if you are battling on track.

My next prediction is, Bottas getting a 3.5 special spec engine for the last 3-4 races to allow him to rear gunner for Hamilton even more effectively. Note, Bottas has already used his 3rd engine at Spec 2 and will need to take a penalty for a higher spec.

It was referenced in the link I posted. Here’s another

https://www.google.pt/amp/s/www.express ... kkonen/amp

Or is that somehow talking about something else, too?

Raikkonen didn't do a 4th run. It was his 3rd run that beat both Mercedes' 3rd run. Then Mercedes pitted for new tyres as did Kimi but Kimi hit traffic whilst they both beat his time.

It showed Hamilton having a big slide in S2.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)

Is that quote taken from that same clip? I don't see Toto claiming what you are (that their CAR was better in the wet). he clearly is claiming that they performed better but never says anything about the car vs. driver. Why listen to him over the guy who was actually behind the wheel?

Someone already debunked your absurd post and all of the inaccuracies and omissions. It's pretty disturbing how disingenuous you can be in here...

As for the first part of your post, Raikkonen did the fastest THIRD run in Q3. He did not do an extra run. Vettel was off his game (or perhaps just playing it safe) in Q3 but Kimi was right on it and he certainly felt that he could have set pole.

I was just pointing out that Bottas lost a lot of times to Massa in the rain. If we look at the overall score, it’s 7-6 in Massa’s favour, and nobody rates Massa in the rain.

The track was in very good condition when Raikkonen set that lap time. Sainz was also going very quickly at the time and up there.