planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Oct 21, 2018 7:45 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 954
pokerman wrote:
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:

All the publications I have seen have Ferrari ahead over the season.


If anyone shows you one you just dismiss it so that's not so difficult : )

Like the one you brought forward that when you actually read it had Ferrari ahead plus it was 2 races out of date?


See, you are doing it again? And that publication was before Merc took over..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2959
pokerman wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
The Amus power ranking table has been collectively taken from the season, they write a power ranking article after each race explaining their reasons using data etc.

Did they also do this last year?


I'm pretty sure they did.

_________________
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: Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2959
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:

All the publications I have seen have Ferrari ahead over the season.


If anyone shows you one you just dismiss it so that's not so difficult : )

Like the one you brought forward that when you actually read it had Ferrari ahead plus it was 2 races out of date?


See, you are doing it again? And that publication was before Merc took over..


The season is longer than 3 races. Before Singapore the Ferrari was the car to have, it's just Ferrari and mainly Vettel ruined any chances of a title win when they had the upper hand also going up the best Hamilton has driven.

However much you try to downplay it Vettel has been poor this year, alot of other drivers would be closer to Hamilton at this current point in the title race. If only Alonso got this kind of car while he was driving for Ferrari.

_________________
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: Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 954
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:

All the publications I have seen have Ferrari ahead over the season.


If anyone shows you one you just dismiss it so that's not so difficult : )

Like the one you brought forward that when you actually read it had Ferrari ahead plus it was 2 races out of date?


See, you are doing it again? And that publication was before Merc took over..


The season is longer than 3 races. Before Singapore the Ferrari was the car to have, it's just Ferrari and mainly Vettel ruined any chances of a title win when they had the upper hand also going up the best Hamilton has driven.

However much you try to downplay it Vettel has been poor this year, alot of other drivers would be closer to Hamilton at this current point in the title race. If only Alonso got this kind of car while he was driving for Ferrari.


You do realize that "Before Singapore " means that Merc will be the car to have in the last 8 races, include Italy to and you have the last 9, include Australia and a couple more and you have Merc as the better car, now that wasn't so hard to imagine was it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2959
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:
AnRs wrote:

If anyone shows you one you just dismiss it so that's not so difficult : )

Like the one you brought forward that when you actually read it had Ferrari ahead plus it was 2 races out of date?


See, you are doing it again? And that publication was before Merc took over..


The season is longer than 3 races. Before Singapore the Ferrari was the car to have, it's just Ferrari and mainly Vettel ruined any chances of a title win when they had the upper hand also going up the best Hamilton has driven.

However much you try to downplay it Vettel has been poor this year, alot of other drivers would be closer to Hamilton at this current point in the title race. If only Alonso got this kind of car while he was driving for Ferrari.


You do realize that "Before Singapore " means that Merc will be the car to have in the last 8 races, include Italy to and you have the last 9, include Australia and a couple more and you have Merc as the better car, now that wasn't so hard to imagine was it?


Over the season Merc will likely edge Ferrari out but this don't cover Vettels mistakes however much you would like it too.

Ferrari was the car to have before Singapore, even in Monza they got a front row and should have won the race. Again Vettel made a mistake and if they lead the first lap 1-2 then it's likely a similar race to Belgium. It's mad how posters try and give Monza to Merc because Hamilton was racing Kimi while also forgetting what Kimi done to his tyres, that was another mistake by Ferrari, don't push and Kimi wins the race. Vettel also had damage of 0.5seconds.

Just because Mercedes have had the better car for the last 3 races and likely till the end of the season doesn't excuse Vettel should have been leading the championship before Singapore and excuses his mistakes. Hamilton upped his game and has performed in all conditions.

_________________
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: Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 954
F1_Ernie wrote:
Over the season Merc will likely edge Ferrari out but this don't cover Vettels mistakes however much you would like it too.

Ferrari was the car to have before Singapore, even in Monza they got a front row and should have won the race. Again Vettel made a mistake and if they lead the first lap 1-2 then it's likely a similar race to Belgium. It's mad how posters try and give Monza to Merc because Hamilton was racing Kimi while also forgetting what Kimi done to his tyres, that was another mistake by Ferrari, don't push and Kimi wins the race. Vettel also had damage of 0.5seconds.

Just because Mercedes have had the better car for the last 3 races and likely till the end of the season doesn't excuse Vettel should have been leading the championship before Singapore and excuses his mistakes. Hamilton upped his game and has performed in all conditions.


I've never made a claim that Vettel is to be excused, just that over the season Merc is the car to have.
In Italy I beleive in race pace Merc had Ferrari covered.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27954
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
They viewed that Red Bull were faster than Ferrari in the race, let's not forget that Verstappen nearly out qualified both Ferrari's and are always faster in the races because they don't have a qualifying mode.

The low rating of Ferrari in Australia actually helps your argument, as for you not being convinced by the list because it disagrees with your assessment of course doesn't surprise me, at least it's independent of what I would consider of any bias.

I'm not looking to grab anything that helps my argument, I'm looking to understand why they rate the cars the way they do. And I don't know enough about them to know what bias they may or may not have, but the way they rank the cars doesn't allow for equality anywhere and it's not something I can agree with. There are a number of races that I would place too close to call yet they have given a clear ranking and I think that's questionable at best. I don't agree that in every race this year one driver was operating at a disadvantage (when talking about Vettel and Hamilton) and I think for much of the season the cars were pretty equal and the drivers made the difference. When you look at huge qualifying gaps you can probably say the car had a lot to do with it, but when one driver clinches it by a tenth or two I'm amazed that people can confidently point at the car without seemingly making any allowances whatsoever for driver performance, particularly when the team mate battle is often less close. I think distilling it down to "Car X was better than Car Y" every time does the drivers a disservice and is not reflective of the season we have had.

Yet you yourself think that you are capable of doing the same thing?

All the publications I have seen have Ferrari ahead over the season.

BIB: explain to me how I'm doing that when I'm saying that if the times are close then it's too hard to call?

To be honest it's hard to know how you define things, last year qualifying was the thing, this year when Ferrari started strong in qualifying it was not so important, now Mercedes are ahead in qualifying again it gets mentioned, it defined who you saw as the best car in Spa last year, now things are apparently allowed to be equal.

Quote:
Arguably, vettel was only so close behind because Hamilton engaged the wrong engine mode. If he hadn't then it's just as probable that Vettel wouldn't have been so close in the first place. And the extra grunt of the Mercedes in the prime overtaking spot on the circuit showed when Vettel couldn't do anything even with the tow.

The most you can say is that the cars looked pretty evenly matched on Sunday. But the Merc is clearly faster on Saturday, which means it's not exactly an equal fight. The Merc has a built in advantage which puts them in the prime slot at the race start.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27954
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:

All the publications I have seen have Ferrari ahead over the season.


If anyone shows you one you just dismiss it so that's not so difficult : )

Like the one you brought forward that when you actually read it had Ferrari ahead plus it was 2 races out of date?


See, you are doing it again? And that publication was before Merc took over..

Also it was before Ferrari's run of being faster, if you are going to bring an article forward bring one that is not out of date.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27954
F1_Ernie wrote:
pokerman wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
The Amus power ranking table has been collectively taken from the season, they write a power ranking article after each race explaining their reasons using data etc.

Did they also do this last year?


I'm pretty sure they did.

I'd love to see it but I wouldn't know how to access a German site.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27954
AnRs wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:
AnRs wrote:
If anyone shows you one you just dismiss it so that's not so difficult : )

Like the one you brought forward that when you actually read it had Ferrari ahead plus it was 2 races out of date?


See, you are doing it again? And that publication was before Merc took over..


The season is longer than 3 races. Before Singapore the Ferrari was the car to have, it's just Ferrari and mainly Vettel ruined any chances of a title win when they had the upper hand also going up the best Hamilton has driven.

However much you try to downplay it Vettel has been poor this year, alot of other drivers would be closer to Hamilton at this current point in the title race. If only Alonso got this kind of car while he was driving for Ferrari.


You do realize that "Before Singapore " means that Merc will be the car to have in the last 8 races, include Italy to and you have the last 9, include Australia and a couple more and you have Merc as the better car, now that wasn't so hard to imagine was it?

Ferrari is seen as being the faster car in Italy, as of date Ferrari still has the edge 10-7.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 5:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 954
pokerman wrote:
Ferrari is seen as being the faster car in Italy, as of date Ferrari still has the edge 10-7.


Well I guess your guess is as good as anyone else.
I would flip it around, probably 10-7 Merc by now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 6:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 1028
Interesting article on how Ferraris mistakes have gifted Mercedes the championship lead thus far

https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/45812129

“Which means, had Ferrari had a perfect season, he could still be leading the championship by 13 points.”

_________________
PF1 pick 10 2016: 7th (1 win, 4 podiums), 2017: 17th (3 podiums)
Awards: Sergio perez trophy & Podium specialist
PF1 pick 3 2015: constructors 2nd, singles 5th
Autosport Gp 2016/17 - 5th
F1 Oracle 2017: 2nd (6 wins), 2016:5th (2wins)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 7:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2585
Location: England
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Ferrari is seen as being the faster car in Italy, as of date Ferrari still has the edge 10-7.


Well I guess your guess is as good as anyone else.
I would flip it around, probably 10-7 Merc by now.


Breakdown please?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2018: {Rookie Year}
Current positon: 1st | 3 Podiums | 1 Win


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 7:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5929
Location: Michigan, USA
Mayhem wrote:
Interesting article on how Ferraris mistakes have gifted Mercedes the championship lead thus far

https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/45812129

“Which means, had Ferrari had a perfect season, he could still be leading the championship by 13 points.”

Interesting indeed... but also, at the current point of development, that's looking like even with a perfect season Ferrari isn't going to win. At this point - unless Ferrari can take a dramatic turn in their form - the Mercedes looks like the clearly quicker car, and it has in race trim since Monza. I don't see Hamilton not extending his advantage by at least 13 points, meaning that he would have won anyway according to that calculation.

Of course, there is the X factor: would Ferrari have fallen off this badly if they were leading the title? There's precedent to think they might have. In 2012 they had the best car, but lost in the development race. In fact, one might argue that Ferrari has gone backwards compared to Mercedes or Red Bull every year for some time.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 9:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 1028
Exediron wrote:
Mayhem wrote:
Interesting article on how Ferraris mistakes have gifted Mercedes the championship lead thus far

https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/45812129

“Which means, had Ferrari had a perfect season, he could still be leading the championship by 13 points.”

Interesting indeed... but also, at the current point of development, that's looking like even with a perfect season Ferrari isn't going to win. At this point - unless Ferrari can take a dramatic turn in their form - the Mercedes looks like the clearly quicker car, and it has in race trim since Monza. I don't see Hamilton not extending his advantage by at least 13 points, meaning that he would have won anyway according to that calculation.

Of course, there is the X factor: would Ferrari have fallen off this badly if they were leading the title? There's precedent to think they might have. In 2012 they had the best car, but lost in the development race. In fact, one might argue that Ferrari has gone backwards compared to Mercedes or Red Bull every year for some time.


Agreed, Not saying Ferrari would have won the title but vettel would be leading at this point and Hamilton would be gaining fast coming towards the final races of the season. What a championship that would have been to watch. Could have been one of the greatest battles.

As you stated would have Ferrari have dropped off at the rate they have no way of knowing but this has become a character trait of theirs in recent years, where they just fall flat on there faces. This has been the worst of it by far in the turbo hybrid era.

It has also raised questions as to what exactly has happened since the passing of Sergio Marchionne. Everything seemed to start going south ever since then.

_________________
PF1 pick 10 2016: 7th (1 win, 4 podiums), 2017: 17th (3 podiums)
Awards: Sergio perez trophy & Podium specialist
PF1 pick 3 2015: constructors 2nd, singles 5th
Autosport Gp 2016/17 - 5th
F1 Oracle 2017: 2nd (6 wins), 2016:5th (2wins)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27954
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Ferrari is seen as being the faster car in Italy, as of date Ferrari still has the edge 10-7.


Well I guess your guess is as good as anyone else.
I would flip it around, probably 10-7 Merc by now.

That's not my guess I leave that up to the experts.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27954
Flash2k11 wrote:
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Ferrari is seen as being the faster car in Italy, as of date Ferrari still has the edge 10-7.


Well I guess your guess is as good as anyone else.
I would flip it around, probably 10-7 Merc by now.


Breakdown please?

Good luck with that. :)

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 954
Flash2k11 wrote:
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Ferrari is seen as being the faster car in Italy, as of date Ferrari still has the edge 10-7.


Well I guess your guess is as good as anyone else.
I would flip it around, probably 10-7 Merc by now.


Breakdown please?


Look I understand that every F1 pundit wants this "Merc wins all titles" to be about something else than that PU again, but in the end in F1 you don't bring in the results without a car to back it up and in this case they started the season with a PU advantage and will end with it.

The anti Vettel brigade in here have already spent pages deniying that Merc over the season is the fastest but IMO it is.
I will not spend pages defending numbers that are only a guess, but that's what all the so called expterts outside the teams are doing to, guessing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1886
AnRs wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Ferrari is seen as being the faster car in Italy, as of date Ferrari still has the edge 10-7.


Well I guess your guess is as good as anyone else.
I would flip it around, probably 10-7 Merc by now.


Breakdown please?


Look I understand that every F1 pundit wants this "Merc wins all titles" to be about something else than that PU again, but in the end in F1 you don't bring in the results without a car to back it up and in this case they started the season with a PU advantage and will end with it.

The anti Vettel brigade in here have already spent pages deniying that Merc over the season is the fastest but IMO it is.
I will not spend pages defending numbers that are only a guess, but that's what all the so called expterts outside the teams are doing to, guessing.


I'd say there is far too much talk about power. The Mercedes looks handy in any circumstance right now, with the odd issues with tyre management.

They are strong through pretty much any kind of corner or zone now, and obviously the straights. As such, I expect Mercedes to be much stronger in Mexico this year than in 2017. Maybe they have no true bogey track right now with how the car is working.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5929
Location: Michigan, USA
AnRs wrote:
Look I understand that every F1 pundit wants this "Merc wins all titles" to be about something else than that PU again, but in the end in F1 you don't bring in the results without a car to back it up and in this case they started the season with a PU advantage and will end with it.

There's more to the car than just the PU, you know. It's pretty obvious Mercedes doesn't have a PU advantage anymore. Look at the customer teams; there's been a very obvious slope in terms of most customers from 2014 to present, where in 2014 just having a Merc engine was a ticket to being competitive, and now the Ferrari teams are stronger.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 6:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2959
It's not even worth replying to that poster, you won't get any good response.

_________________
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: Thu Oct 11, 2018 6:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 954
Exediron wrote:
AnRs wrote:
Look I understand that every F1 pundit wants this "Merc wins all titles" to be about something else than that PU again, but in the end in F1 you don't bring in the results without a car to back it up and in this case they started the season with a PU advantage and will end with it.

There's more to the car than just the PU, you know. It's pretty obvious Mercedes doesn't have a PU advantage anymore. Look at the customer teams; there's been a very obvious slope in terms of most customers from 2014 to present, where in 2014 just having a Merc engine was a ticket to being competitive, and now the Ferrari teams are stronger.


The dominant years was built on that pillow, PU and a better handling off the tyres built on different ways off handling traction, and still is IMO.
FIA have tried to strap it down with diiferent actions, but every year Merc finds a way to come back and kudos to them for that, well done.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:48 pm
Posts: 584
Mayhem wrote:

Agreed, Not saying Ferrari would have won the title but vettel would be leading at this point and Hamilton would be gaining fast coming towards the final races of the season. What a championship that would have been to watch. Could have been one of the greatest battles.

As you stated would have Ferrari have dropped off at the rate they have no way of knowing but this has become a character trait of theirs in recent years, where they just fall flat on there faces. This has been the worst of it by far in the turbo hybrid era.

It has also raised questions as to what exactly has happened since the passing of Sergio Marchionne. Everything seemed to start going south ever since then.


I agree, it would have been an amazing battle. Unfortunately, Vettel wasn't capable of it, and he probably never will be unless he's in the best car for the majority of the season.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:48 pm
Posts: 584
F1_Ernie wrote:

Over the season Merc will likely edge Ferrari out but this don't cover Vettels mistakes however much you would like it too.

Ferrari was the car to have before Singapore, even in Monza they got a front row and should have won the race. Again Vettel made a mistake and if they lead the first lap 1-2 then it's likely a similar race to Belgium. It's mad how posters try and give Monza to Merc because Hamilton was racing Kimi while also forgetting what Kimi done to his tyres, that was another mistake by Ferrari, don't push and Kimi wins the race. Vettel also had damage of 0.5seconds.

Just because Mercedes have had the better car for the last 3 races and likely till the end of the season doesn't excuse Vettel should have been leading the championship before Singapore and excuses his mistakes. Hamilton upped his game and has performed in all conditions.


I will never understand the logic behind giving Monza to Mercedes. At best you could only argue they were equal. I wouldn't put it past AnRs though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Ocon wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Over the season Merc will likely edge Ferrari out but this don't cover Vettels mistakes however much you would like it too.

Ferrari was the car to have before Singapore, even in Monza they got a front row and should have won the race. Again Vettel made a mistake and if they lead the first lap 1-2 then it's likely a similar race to Belgium. It's mad how posters try and give Monza to Merc because Hamilton was racing Kimi while also forgetting what Kimi done to his tyres, that was another mistake by Ferrari, don't push and Kimi wins the race. Vettel also had damage of 0.5seconds.

Just because Mercedes have had the better car for the last 3 races and likely till the end of the season doesn't excuse Vettel should have been leading the championship before Singapore and excuses his mistakes. Hamilton upped his game and has performed in all conditions.


I will never understand the logic behind giving Monza to Mercedes. At best you could only argue they were equal. I wouldn't put it past AnRs though.

The logic is simple: Hamilton was quicker than Kimi. Vettel had a damaged car so it's unclear just how much faster he may have been able to go. Most accept that he probably would have been quicker than Kimi, but the question remains as to exactly how much. Based on the available evidence the Mercedes was no slower than the Ferrari, that's for sure. I would agree that in the absence of Vettel as a barometer it's probably best to list them as equal, but if you had to pick one there's more evidence on race day that the Mercedes was better than that the Ferrari was. In a nutshell, Hamilton was quicker than Kimi; Vettel would likely have been quicker than Kimi. But would Vettel's gap over Kimi have been bigger than Hamilton's? And this is my issue with things like the Amus ratings. They use assumptions that Vettel would have been quicker to determine that the Ferrari was the quicker car, but that doesn't really give an accurate picture of what actually happened. And people point to it and make a blanket claim that the Ferrari was quicker and try to make out that Hamilton was operating at a disadvantage, when the available evidence suggests he really wasn't.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Ocon wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Over the season Merc will likely edge Ferrari out but this don't cover Vettels mistakes however much you would like it too.

Ferrari was the car to have before Singapore, even in Monza they got a front row and should have won the race. Again Vettel made a mistake and if they lead the first lap 1-2 then it's likely a similar race to Belgium. It's mad how posters try and give Monza to Merc because Hamilton was racing Kimi while also forgetting what Kimi done to his tyres, that was another mistake by Ferrari, don't push and Kimi wins the race. Vettel also had damage of 0.5seconds.

Just because Mercedes have had the better car for the last 3 races and likely till the end of the season doesn't excuse Vettel should have been leading the championship before Singapore and excuses his mistakes. Hamilton upped his game and has performed in all conditions.


I will never understand the logic behind giving Monza to Mercedes. At best you could only argue they were equal. I wouldn't put it past AnRs though.

The logic is simple: Hamilton was quicker than Kimi. Vettel had a damaged car so it's unclear just how much faster he may have been able to go. Most accept that he probably would have been quicker than Kimi, but the question remains as to exactly how much. Based on the available evidence the Mercedes was no slower than the Ferrari, that's for sure. I would agree that in the absence of Vettel as a barometer it's probably best to list them as equal, but if you had to pick one there's more evidence on race day that the Mercedes was better than that the Ferrari was. In a nutshell, Hamilton was quicker than Kimi; Vettel would likely have been quicker than Kimi. But would Vettel's gap over Kimi have been bigger than Hamilton's? And this is my issue with things like the Amus ratings. They use assumptions that Vettel would have been quicker to determine that the Ferrari was the quicker car, but that doesn't really give an accurate picture of what actually happened. And people point to it and make a blanket claim that the Ferrari was quicker and try to make out that Hamilton was operating at a disadvantage, when the available evidence suggests he really wasn't.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2959
Zoue wrote:
Ocon wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Over the season Merc will likely edge Ferrari out but this don't cover Vettels mistakes however much you would like it too.

Ferrari was the car to have before Singapore, even in Monza they got a front row and should have won the race. Again Vettel made a mistake and if they lead the first lap 1-2 then it's likely a similar race to Belgium. It's mad how posters try and give Monza to Merc because Hamilton was racing Kimi while also forgetting what Kimi done to his tyres, that was another mistake by Ferrari, don't push and Kimi wins the race. Vettel also had damage of 0.5seconds.

Just because Mercedes have had the better car for the last 3 races and likely till the end of the season doesn't excuse Vettel should have been leading the championship before Singapore and excuses his mistakes. Hamilton upped his game and has performed in all conditions.


I will never understand the logic behind giving Monza to Mercedes. At best you could only argue they were equal. I wouldn't put it past AnRs though.

The logic is simple: Hamilton was quicker than Kimi. Vettel had a damaged car so it's unclear just how much faster he may have been able to go. Most accept that he probably would have been quicker than Kimi, but the question remains as to exactly how much. Based on the available evidence the Mercedes was no slower than the Ferrari, that's for sure. I would agree that in the absence of Vettel as a barometer it's probably best to list them as equal, but if you had to pick one there's more evidence on race day that the Mercedes was better than that the Ferrari was. In a nutshell, Hamilton was quicker than Kimi; Vettel would likely have been quicker than Kimi. But would Vettel's gap over Kimi have been bigger than Hamilton's? And this is my issue with things like the Amus ratings. They use assumptions that Vettel would have been quicker to determine that the Ferrari was the quicker car, but that doesn't really give an accurate picture of what actually happened. And people point to it and make a blanket claim that the Ferrari was quicker and try to make out that Hamilton was operating at a disadvantage, when the available evidence suggests he really wasn't.


Well if you are going to use an accurate picture of what actually happened then Ferrari lost the race. Kimi should have won the race but Ferrari asked him to push too hard for too long on brand new tyres to cover for a SC but it caused them to blister, this damage was made worse by being held up by Bottas. Kimi should have won the race and Hamilton wouldnt have had a big enough car advantage to overtake Kimi without other circumstances being involved. Also Vettel had damage worth 0.5 and Kimi is also awful on a Sunday.

If Vettel doesn't go for a gap which was never there then Ferrari lead the first lap 1-2 and Hamilton isn't beating both Ferraris. Hamilton was quick but he needed Vettel/Ferrari mistakes to win the race. Hamilton has driven great this season but as plenty are saying Vettel and Ferrari have made this championship easier than it should have been.

_________________
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: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
Mayhem wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Mayhem wrote:
Interesting article on how Ferraris mistakes have gifted Mercedes the championship lead thus far

https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/45812129

“Which means, had Ferrari had a perfect season, he could still be leading the championship by 13 points.”

Interesting indeed... but also, at the current point of development, that's looking like even with a perfect season Ferrari isn't going to win. At this point - unless Ferrari can take a dramatic turn in their form - the Mercedes looks like the clearly quicker car, and it has in race trim since Monza. I don't see Hamilton not extending his advantage by at least 13 points, meaning that he would have won anyway according to that calculation.

Of course, there is the X factor: would Ferrari have fallen off this badly if they were leading the title? There's precedent to think they might have. In 2012 they had the best car, but lost in the development race. In fact, one might argue that Ferrari has gone backwards compared to Mercedes or Red Bull every year for some time.


Agreed, Not saying Ferrari would have won the title but vettel would be leading at this point and Hamilton would be gaining fast coming towards the final races of the season. What a championship that would have been to watch. Could have been one of the greatest battles.

As you stated would have Ferrari have dropped off at the rate they have no way of knowing but this has become a character trait of theirs in recent years, where they just fall flat on there faces. This has been the worst of it by far in the turbo hybrid era.

It has also raised questions as to what exactly has happened since the passing of Sergio Marchionne. Everything seemed to start going south ever since then.


I agree with the general gist, but if we have to go down the road of "if Ferrari had the perfect season", then the same shall be equally applied to the Merc. They also dropped some points along the way, Poker won't stop reminding us how the blasted VSC stole a race from Hamilton early this year, or mechanical faults or Lewis having a slow start of the year. How would that make the table look?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Ocon wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Over the season Merc will likely edge Ferrari out but this don't cover Vettels mistakes however much you would like it too.

Ferrari was the car to have before Singapore, even in Monza they got a front row and should have won the race. Again Vettel made a mistake and if they lead the first lap 1-2 then it's likely a similar race to Belgium. It's mad how posters try and give Monza to Merc because Hamilton was racing Kimi while also forgetting what Kimi done to his tyres, that was another mistake by Ferrari, don't push and Kimi wins the race. Vettel also had damage of 0.5seconds.

Just because Mercedes have had the better car for the last 3 races and likely till the end of the season doesn't excuse Vettel should have been leading the championship before Singapore and excuses his mistakes. Hamilton upped his game and has performed in all conditions.


I will never understand the logic behind giving Monza to Mercedes. At best you could only argue they were equal. I wouldn't put it past AnRs though.

The logic is simple: Hamilton was quicker than Kimi. Vettel had a damaged car so it's unclear just how much faster he may have been able to go. Most accept that he probably would have been quicker than Kimi, but the question remains as to exactly how much. Based on the available evidence the Mercedes was no slower than the Ferrari, that's for sure. I would agree that in the absence of Vettel as a barometer it's probably best to list them as equal, but if you had to pick one there's more evidence on race day that the Mercedes was better than that the Ferrari was. In a nutshell, Hamilton was quicker than Kimi; Vettel would likely have been quicker than Kimi. But would Vettel's gap over Kimi have been bigger than Hamilton's? And this is my issue with things like the Amus ratings. They use assumptions that Vettel would have been quicker to determine that the Ferrari was the quicker car, but that doesn't really give an accurate picture of what actually happened. And people point to it and make a blanket claim that the Ferrari was quicker and try to make out that Hamilton was operating at a disadvantage, when the available evidence suggests he really wasn't.


Well if you are going to use an accurate picture of what actually happened then Ferrari lost the race. Kimi should have won the race but Ferrari asked him to push too hard for too long on brand new tyres to cover for a SC but it caused them to blister, this damage was made worse by being held up by Bottas. Kimi should have won the race and Hamilton wouldnt have had a big enough car advantage to overtake Kimi without other circumstances being involved. Also Vettel had damage worth 0.5 and Kimi is also awful on a Sunday.

If Vettel doesn't go for a gap which was never there then Ferrari lead the first lap 1-2 and Hamilton isn't beating both Ferraris. Hamilton was quick but he needed Vettel/Ferrari mistakes to win the race. Hamilton has driven great this season but as plenty are saying Vettel and Ferrari have made this championship easier than it should have been.

Agreed that Ferrari should have done better than they did, particularly Vettel. But not because they had the better race car, which is the point being discussed. Also agree that Vettel and Ferrari have made it easier for Hamilton and Mercedes than it should have been


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27954
AnRs wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
AnRs wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Ferrari is seen as being the faster car in Italy, as of date Ferrari still has the edge 10-7.


Well I guess your guess is as good as anyone else.
I would flip it around, probably 10-7 Merc by now.


Breakdown please?


Look I understand that every F1 pundit wants this "Merc wins all titles" to be about something else than that PU again, but in the end in F1 you don't bring in the results without a car to back it up and in this case they started the season with a PU advantage and will end with it.

The anti Vettel brigade in here have already spent pages deniying that Merc over the season is the fastest but IMO it is.
I will not spend pages defending numbers that are only a guess, but that's what all the so called expterts outside the teams are doing to, guessing.

So basically you have nothing and don't want to waste your time trying to back up things that you say?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27954
Ocon wrote:
Mayhem wrote:

Agreed, Not saying Ferrari would have won the title but vettel would be leading at this point and Hamilton would be gaining fast coming towards the final races of the season. What a championship that would have been to watch. Could have been one of the greatest battles.

As you stated would have Ferrari have dropped off at the rate they have no way of knowing but this has become a character trait of theirs in recent years, where they just fall flat on there faces. This has been the worst of it by far in the turbo hybrid era.

It has also raised questions as to what exactly has happened since the passing of Sergio Marchionne. Everything seemed to start going south ever since then.


I agree, it would have been an amazing battle. Unfortunately, Vettel wasn't capable of it, and he probably never will be unless he's in the best car for the majority of the season.

You know even after the mistakes made there was no panic for Vettel because of the car he had, it must have come as a shock for him to see the turn around in performance of the Mercedes, all the time he had to turn things around suddenly became no time at all.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27954
Siao7 wrote:
Mayhem wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Mayhem wrote:
Interesting article on how Ferraris mistakes have gifted Mercedes the championship lead thus far

https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/45812129

“Which means, had Ferrari had a perfect season, he could still be leading the championship by 13 points.”

Interesting indeed... but also, at the current point of development, that's looking like even with a perfect season Ferrari isn't going to win. At this point - unless Ferrari can take a dramatic turn in their form - the Mercedes looks like the clearly quicker car, and it has in race trim since Monza. I don't see Hamilton not extending his advantage by at least 13 points, meaning that he would have won anyway according to that calculation.

Of course, there is the X factor: would Ferrari have fallen off this badly if they were leading the title? There's precedent to think they might have. In 2012 they had the best car, but lost in the development race. In fact, one might argue that Ferrari has gone backwards compared to Mercedes or Red Bull every year for some time.


Agreed, Not saying Ferrari would have won the title but vettel would be leading at this point and Hamilton would be gaining fast coming towards the final races of the season. What a championship that would have been to watch. Could have been one of the greatest battles.

As you stated would have Ferrari have dropped off at the rate they have no way of knowing but this has become a character trait of theirs in recent years, where they just fall flat on there faces. This has been the worst of it by far in the turbo hybrid era.

It has also raised questions as to what exactly has happened since the passing of Sergio Marchionne. Everything seemed to start going south ever since then.


I agree with the general gist, but if we have to go down the road of "if Ferrari had the perfect season", then the same shall be equally applied to the Merc. They also dropped some points along the way, Poker won't stop reminding us how the blasted VSC stole a race from Hamilton early this year, or mechanical faults or Lewis having a slow start of the year. How would that make the table look?

Again what is this about me continually harping on about things, I mentioned it at the time only.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Mayhem wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Mayhem wrote:
Interesting article on how Ferraris mistakes have gifted Mercedes the championship lead thus far

https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/45812129

“Which means, had Ferrari had a perfect season, he could still be leading the championship by 13 points.”

Interesting indeed... but also, at the current point of development, that's looking like even with a perfect season Ferrari isn't going to win. At this point - unless Ferrari can take a dramatic turn in their form - the Mercedes looks like the clearly quicker car, and it has in race trim since Monza. I don't see Hamilton not extending his advantage by at least 13 points, meaning that he would have won anyway according to that calculation.

Of course, there is the X factor: would Ferrari have fallen off this badly if they were leading the title? There's precedent to think they might have. In 2012 they had the best car, but lost in the development race. In fact, one might argue that Ferrari has gone backwards compared to Mercedes or Red Bull every year for some time.


Agreed, Not saying Ferrari would have won the title but vettel would be leading at this point and Hamilton would be gaining fast coming towards the final races of the season. What a championship that would have been to watch. Could have been one of the greatest battles.

As you stated would have Ferrari have dropped off at the rate they have no way of knowing but this has become a character trait of theirs in recent years, where they just fall flat on there faces. This has been the worst of it by far in the turbo hybrid era.

It has also raised questions as to what exactly has happened since the passing of Sergio Marchionne. Everything seemed to start going south ever since then.


I agree with the general gist, but if we have to go down the road of "if Ferrari had the perfect season", then the same shall be equally applied to the Merc. They also dropped some points along the way, Poker won't stop reminding us how the blasted VSC stole a race from Hamilton early this year, or mechanical faults or Lewis having a slow start of the year. How would that make the table look?

Again what is this about me continually harping on about things, I mentioned it at the time only.

I'll correct it then, you wouldn't stop harping about it at the time. Better?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5480
Here we go again...Guess it's that time of year for the excuses and revisionism. You'd think that, in a year where Ferrari/Vettel so clearly bottled it, we wouldn't have to go through this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 2:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3414
Zoue wrote:
Ocon wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Over the season Merc will likely edge Ferrari out but this don't cover Vettels mistakes however much you would like it too.

Ferrari was the car to have before Singapore, even in Monza they got a front row and should have won the race. Again Vettel made a mistake and if they lead the first lap 1-2 then it's likely a similar race to Belgium. It's mad how posters try and give Monza to Merc because Hamilton was racing Kimi while also forgetting what Kimi done to his tyres, that was another mistake by Ferrari, don't push and Kimi wins the race. Vettel also had damage of 0.5seconds.

Just because Mercedes have had the better car for the last 3 races and likely till the end of the season doesn't excuse Vettel should have been leading the championship before Singapore and excuses his mistakes. Hamilton upped his game and has performed in all conditions.


I will never understand the logic behind giving Monza to Mercedes. At best you could only argue they were equal. I wouldn't put it past AnRs though.

The logic is simple: Hamilton was quicker than Kimi. Vettel had a damaged car so it's unclear just how much faster he may have been able to go. Most accept that he probably would have been quicker than Kimi, but the question remains as to exactly how much. Based on the available evidence the Mercedes was no slower than the Ferrari, that's for sure. I would agree that in the absence of Vettel as a barometer it's probably best to list them as equal, but if you had to pick one there's more evidence on race day that the Mercedes was better than that the Ferrari was. In a nutshell, Hamilton was quicker than Kimi; Vettel would likely have been quicker than Kimi. But would Vettel's gap over Kimi have been bigger than Hamilton's? And this is my issue with things like the Amus ratings. They use assumptions that Vettel would have been quicker to determine that the Ferrari was the quicker car, but that doesn't really give an accurate picture of what actually happened. And people point to it and make a blanket claim that the Ferrari was quicker and try to make out that Hamilton was operating at a disadvantage, when the available evidence suggests he really wasn't.



Hamilton is always faster than Kimi in a race. The performance gap between the cars rarely hides that fact.
Everyone knows that if vettel had been on pole or gotten by kimi on lap 1 he likely would have won because his race pace is always superior than kimi’s.
Both Ferraris locked out the front row despite a bad lap by vettel, which is the real reason he didn’t get pole, not the tow.
Bottas was nowhere close to the ferraris during qualifying.
With all that in mind it is not logical to say that merc was the quickest car at Monza.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
kleefton wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Ocon wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Over the season Merc will likely edge Ferrari out but this don't cover Vettels mistakes however much you would like it too.

Ferrari was the car to have before Singapore, even in Monza they got a front row and should have won the race. Again Vettel made a mistake and if they lead the first lap 1-2 then it's likely a similar race to Belgium. It's mad how posters try and give Monza to Merc because Hamilton was racing Kimi while also forgetting what Kimi done to his tyres, that was another mistake by Ferrari, don't push and Kimi wins the race. Vettel also had damage of 0.5seconds.

Just because Mercedes have had the better car for the last 3 races and likely till the end of the season doesn't excuse Vettel should have been leading the championship before Singapore and excuses his mistakes. Hamilton upped his game and has performed in all conditions.


I will never understand the logic behind giving Monza to Mercedes. At best you could only argue they were equal. I wouldn't put it past AnRs though.

The logic is simple: Hamilton was quicker than Kimi. Vettel had a damaged car so it's unclear just how much faster he may have been able to go. Most accept that he probably would have been quicker than Kimi, but the question remains as to exactly how much. Based on the available evidence the Mercedes was no slower than the Ferrari, that's for sure. I would agree that in the absence of Vettel as a barometer it's probably best to list them as equal, but if you had to pick one there's more evidence on race day that the Mercedes was better than that the Ferrari was. In a nutshell, Hamilton was quicker than Kimi; Vettel would likely have been quicker than Kimi. But would Vettel's gap over Kimi have been bigger than Hamilton's? And this is my issue with things like the Amus ratings. They use assumptions that Vettel would have been quicker to determine that the Ferrari was the quicker car, but that doesn't really give an accurate picture of what actually happened. And people point to it and make a blanket claim that the Ferrari was quicker and try to make out that Hamilton was operating at a disadvantage, when the available evidence suggests he really wasn't.



Hamilton is always faster than Kimi in a race. The performance gap between the cars rarely hides that fact.
Everyone knows that if vettel had been on pole or gotten by kimi on lap 1 he likely would have won because his race pace is always superior than kimi’s.
Both Ferraris locked out the front row despite a bad lap by vettel, which is the real reason he didn’t get pole, not the tow.
Bottas was nowhere close to the ferraris during qualifying.
With all that in mind it is not logical to say that merc was the quickest car at Monza.

all of the above are broadly true, but they don't lead to the conclusion you made.

I've answered the first couple of points already in the post you replied to.

As to qualifying, the gap was less than 2 tenths from Hamilton to Kimi, with Kimi having a perfect tow. Are we saying that without the tow Kimi may still have beaten Hamilton? With a gap that size, is it reasonable to say that it must be down to the car? And Hamilton had a much bigger gap pver Bottas in the following race, so I shouldn't use Bottas as the true barometer of the car.

Point is there were no signs in the race to say that the Ferrari was quicker. Doesn't mean that the Mercedes had to be quicker, either, but I don't know how anyone can confidently say the Ferrari was the faster race car based simply on a guess that Vettel would have outpaced Kimi by a greater margin than Hamilton did.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1886
I have Ferrari and Mercedes as equal for Monza (race) but gave the race weekend to Ferrari for qualifying given their front row lockout despite a fine Hamilton effort, which suggests they had a real edge in qualifying.. an edge they should have converted one way or another into a race win.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3414
Zoue wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Ocon wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

Over the season Merc will likely edge Ferrari out but this don't cover Vettels mistakes however much you would like it too.

Ferrari was the car to have before Singapore, even in Monza they got a front row and should have won the race. Again Vettel made a mistake and if they lead the first lap 1-2 then it's likely a similar race to Belgium. It's mad how posters try and give Monza to Merc because Hamilton was racing Kimi while also forgetting what Kimi done to his tyres, that was another mistake by Ferrari, don't push and Kimi wins the race. Vettel also had damage of 0.5seconds.

Just because Mercedes have had the better car for the last 3 races and likely till the end of the season doesn't excuse Vettel should have been leading the championship before Singapore and excuses his mistakes. Hamilton upped his game and has performed in all conditions.


I will never understand the logic behind giving Monza to Mercedes. At best you could only argue they were equal. I wouldn't put it past AnRs though.

The logic is simple: Hamilton was quicker than Kimi. Vettel had a damaged car so it's unclear just how much faster he may have been able to go. Most accept that he probably would have been quicker than Kimi, but the question remains as to exactly how much. Based on the available evidence the Mercedes was no slower than the Ferrari, that's for sure. I would agree that in the absence of Vettel as a barometer it's probably best to list them as equal, but if you had to pick one there's more evidence on race day that the Mercedes was better than that the Ferrari was. In a nutshell, Hamilton was quicker than Kimi; Vettel would likely have been quicker than Kimi. But would Vettel's gap over Kimi have been bigger than Hamilton's? And this is my issue with things like the Amus ratings. They use assumptions that Vettel would have been quicker to determine that the Ferrari was the quicker car, but that doesn't really give an accurate picture of what actually happened. And people point to it and make a blanket claim that the Ferrari was quicker and try to make out that Hamilton was operating at a disadvantage, when the available evidence suggests he really wasn't.



Hamilton is always faster than Kimi in a race. The performance gap between the cars rarely hides that fact.
Everyone knows that if vettel had been on pole or gotten by kimi on lap 1 he likely would have won because his race pace is always superior than kimi’s.
Both Ferraris locked out the front row despite a bad lap by vettel, which is the real reason he didn’t get pole, not the tow.
Bottas was nowhere close to the ferraris during qualifying.
With all that in mind it is not logical to say that merc was the quickest car at Monza.

all of the above are broadly true, but they don't lead to the conclusion you made.

I've answered the first couple of points already in the post you replied to.

As to qualifying, the gap was less than 2 tenths from Hamilton to Kimi, with Kimi having a perfect tow. Are we saying that without the tow Kimi may still have beaten Hamilton? With a gap that size, is it reasonable to say that it must be down to the car? And Hamilton had a much bigger gap pver Bottas in the following race, so I shouldn't use Bottas as the true barometer of the car.

Point is there were no signs in the race to say that the Ferrari was quicker. Doesn't mean that the Mercedes had to be quicker, either, but I don't know how anyone can confidently say the Ferrari was the faster race car based simply on a guess that Vettel would have outpaced Kimi by a greater margin than Hamilton did.


Too much is being made out of the tow. I’ve read someone estimate that raikonnen may have gotten 0.025 or something as insignificant as that from towing vettel. Looking at his onboard lap it is easy to see why. Vettel was just too far in front for the tow to yield any real advantage.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q5_fo16E4LU

I understand that there was no proof of Mercedes being slower in the race, but then you can only assign a question mark to that. Because Hamilton being faster than Rai in the race isn’t proof that merc is faster given both drivers’ recent history.

So if Ferrari is faster in qualy and in the race we can’t tell who is faster then it seems we can’t claim that Mercedes was faster in Monza overall, because even though Lewis won, there were a bunch of things that needed to fall into place for him to win, while also considering both ferraris started on the front row in spite of vettel not putting in a good lap.


Last edited by kleefton on Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Invade wrote:
I have Ferrari and Mercedes as equal for Monza (race) but gave the race weekend to Ferrari for qualifying given their front row lockout despite a fine Hamilton effort, which suggests they had a real edge in qualifying.. an edge they should have converted one way or another into a race win.

yeah I'm on board with that :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 7:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5929
Location: Michigan, USA
Invade wrote:
I have Ferrari and Mercedes as equal for Monza (race) but gave the race weekend to Ferrari for qualifying given their front row lockout despite a fine Hamilton effort, which suggests they had a real edge in qualifying.. an edge they should have converted one way or another into a race win.

I'd say Ferrari was quicker in quali, but Mercedes seemed to be quicker in the race. It's inconclusive, however, because Vettel took himself out of the running so early. Calling it a draw weekend is fair.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


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: Laz_T800, owenmahamilton 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