planetf1.com

It is currently Fri Nov 15, 2019 12:18 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33076
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Zoue could just be questioning the size of the gap rather than rejecting the Ferrari being quicker tbf. I don't think its 0.5 either, the 0.2/0.3 I read from AMuS I think sounds more like it.

No he saw the C5 tyre gap of 0.003s and keeps posting like this has some special reference.

Strange you should say this. I wrote the following:

Zoue wrote:
my understanding is the race sims had Ferrari 2-3 tenths quicker.

Overall I'd agree the Ferrari looks like the quicker car so far and going by Bottas' comments the Merc looks trickier to dial in. However the last minute display by Mercedes does tend to indicate they've been holding back a bit and there might be more to come from them. Don't forget Hamilton also put a lap on the C4s which was 2-3 tenths quicker than anything the Ferraris had done (see further up this page), so it's also possible that different tyres suit the cars better.

In summary for me advantage Ferrari but I wouldn't write Mercedes off just yet

which you replied to, and I followed it up with
Zoue wrote:
Is it? Are you really saying that there's no evidence from the past that different cars suit the softer/harder compounds better? I'd disagree with that, quite strongly.

I'm not disagreeing with you that the Ferrari looks quicker. I am disagreeing that you can make any proclamations on how big the deficit is based on testing where we don't know the details of the programs the teams were running. And the final days' laps raise questions as to how far behind Mercedes actually are.

How do you glean from that that I'm saying the Ferrari isn't quicker?

There is clearly the implication that perhaps Mercedes are holding something back, "the race sims show that Ferrari are quicker however the last minute display by Mercedes tends to show they are holding something back", I wouldn't call that an acknowledgement of Ferrari being quicker per se.

_________________
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: (8)


Last edited by pokerman on Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33076
tootsie323 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
https://www.formule1.nl/nieuws/verstappen-wat-hamilton-doet-kunnen-vettel-alonso-ricciardo-en-ik-ook/

Verstappen says that Vettel, Alonso, Ricciardo and himself could have been champions just as easily with that Mercedes.

To say that Vettel could have been is ridiculous whilst Ricciardo took a tonking from Verstappen himself, however they all probably would have beaten Bottas and the mistake prone Vettel including I presume Vettel's twin brother in some kind of alternative universe were Verstappen himself wasn't crashing consistently in the first 6 races of the season and then later on with a backmarker car, but of course we know none of these were his mistakes.

Riccardo's 'tonking' included eight retirements. I do believe that any of the top-level drivers could have won in that Mercedes. I'd also argue that a little more switched-on Ferrari team and Vettel (or other top driver) could have won in that Ferrari. The question I'd pose is - would they have?

Verstappen was basically always running in front of Ricciardo when he retired, regarding Mercedes and Ferrari who are these top drivers that are better than Hamilton or Vettel or are we theorising these two drivers being out of the picture?

I won't necessarily argue that Verstappen was faster than Riccardo; just took issue with the word 'tonking.'
Yes, I'd theorise Hamilton and Vettel being 'out of the picture' in terms of who could have won the 2018 WDC in the Mercedes (or even the Ferrari) and agree with Verstappen's assessment. Vettel could have been champion last year; a couple of silly driver errors and a couple of poor team calls add up to a missed opportunity. I'd guess that any top-tier driver could have won the 2018 title in either the Merc of Ferrari.

The performance gap between Verstappen and Ricciardo was similar to the gap we saw between Hamilton and Bottas, and between Vettel and Kimi, so for me tonking is well apt.

Theorising that any top driver could have won the titles in the Ferrari and Mercedes if both Hamilton and Vettel were out of the picture is true but then again is kind of missing the point that with top teams come top drivers.

In respect to Hamilton you can only really look to deride his title if you don't rate Vettel, in respect to Verstappen I would say he's basically the only driver who didn't have a fair chance in the field given his ability along with Alonso, but then how often has F1 ever given fair chance to all the drivers that deserved it in any given year, has Hamilton himself had fair chance every single year that he's completed in F1?

This is F1 and not a spec series, I understand the frustration of Verstappen but if the boot was on the other foot I doubt he would be so vocal about the inequalities?

_________________
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: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Zoue could just be questioning the size of the gap rather than rejecting the Ferrari being quicker tbf. I don't think its 0.5 either, the 0.2/0.3 I read from AMuS I think sounds more like it.

No he saw the C5 tyre gap of 0.003s and keeps posting like this has some special reference.

Strange you should say this. I wrote the following:

Zoue wrote:
my understanding is the race sims had Ferrari 2-3 tenths quicker.

Overall I'd agree the Ferrari looks like the quicker car so far and going by Bottas' comments the Merc looks trickier to dial in. However the last minute display by Mercedes does tend to indicate they've been holding back a bit and there might be more to come from them. Don't forget Hamilton also put a lap on the C4s which was 2-3 tenths quicker than anything the Ferraris had done (see further up this page), so it's also possible that different tyres suit the cars better.

In summary for me advantage Ferrari but I wouldn't write Mercedes off just yet

which you replied to, and I followed it up with
Zoue wrote:
Is it? Are you really saying that there's no evidence from the past that different cars suit the softer/harder compounds better? I'd disagree with that, quite strongly.

I'm not disagreeing with you that the Ferrari looks quicker. I am disagreeing that you can make any proclamations on how big the deficit is based on testing where we don't know the details of the programs the teams were running. And the final days' laps raise questions as to how far behind Mercedes actually are.

How do you glean from that that I'm saying the Ferrari isn't quicker?

There is clearly the implication that perhaps Mercedes are holding something back, "the race sims show that Ferrari are quicker however the last minute display by Mercedes tends to show they are holding something back", I wouldn't call that an acknowledgement of Ferrari being quicker per se.

I thought the post where I categorically said that I thought Ferrari were quicker but the size of the gap is up for debate was pretty unambiguous, but if you'd rather infer meaning rather than take what was specifically stated then there's not a lot I can do about that. But I hope you understand that it makes conversations a little difficult when you insist on using your own interpretation rather than take what was actually said.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33076
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Zoue could just be questioning the size of the gap rather than rejecting the Ferrari being quicker tbf. I don't think its 0.5 either, the 0.2/0.3 I read from AMuS I think sounds more like it.

No he saw the C5 tyre gap of 0.003s and keeps posting like this has some special reference.

Strange you should say this. I wrote the following:

Zoue wrote:
my understanding is the race sims had Ferrari 2-3 tenths quicker.

Overall I'd agree the Ferrari looks like the quicker car so far and going by Bottas' comments the Merc looks trickier to dial in. However the last minute display by Mercedes does tend to indicate they've been holding back a bit and there might be more to come from them. Don't forget Hamilton also put a lap on the C4s which was 2-3 tenths quicker than anything the Ferraris had done (see further up this page), so it's also possible that different tyres suit the cars better.

In summary for me advantage Ferrari but I wouldn't write Mercedes off just yet

which you replied to, and I followed it up with
Zoue wrote:
Is it? Are you really saying that there's no evidence from the past that different cars suit the softer/harder compounds better? I'd disagree with that, quite strongly.

I'm not disagreeing with you that the Ferrari looks quicker. I am disagreeing that you can make any proclamations on how big the deficit is based on testing where we don't know the details of the programs the teams were running. And the final days' laps raise questions as to how far behind Mercedes actually are.

How do you glean from that that I'm saying the Ferrari isn't quicker?

There is clearly the implication that perhaps Mercedes are holding something back, "the race sims show that Ferrari are quicker however the last minute display by Mercedes tends to show they are holding something back", I wouldn't call that an acknowledgement of Ferrari being quicker per se.

I thought the post where I categorically said that I thought Ferrari were quicker but the size of the gap is up for debate was pretty unambiguous, but if you'd rather infer meaning rather than take what was specifically stated then there's not a lot I can do about that. But I hope you understand that it makes conversations a little difficult when you insist on using your own interpretation rather than take what was actually said.

I would say it's not clear at all when insistence is being made that Mercedes is holding something back, it's countering the idea that it might be a large gap and it might only be a small gap from which then can be perceived that the gap is reasonably close?

It's just a general observation that giving Ferrari any sort of noticeable advantage seems not to be desirable?

_________________
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: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 2:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
No he saw the C5 tyre gap of 0.003s and keeps posting like this has some special reference.

Strange you should say this. I wrote the following:

Zoue wrote:
my understanding is the race sims had Ferrari 2-3 tenths quicker.

Overall I'd agree the Ferrari looks like the quicker car so far and going by Bottas' comments the Merc looks trickier to dial in. However the last minute display by Mercedes does tend to indicate they've been holding back a bit and there might be more to come from them. Don't forget Hamilton also put a lap on the C4s which was 2-3 tenths quicker than anything the Ferraris had done (see further up this page), so it's also possible that different tyres suit the cars better.

In summary for me advantage Ferrari but I wouldn't write Mercedes off just yet

which you replied to, and I followed it up with
Zoue wrote:
Is it? Are you really saying that there's no evidence from the past that different cars suit the softer/harder compounds better? I'd disagree with that, quite strongly.

I'm not disagreeing with you that the Ferrari looks quicker. I am disagreeing that you can make any proclamations on how big the deficit is based on testing where we don't know the details of the programs the teams were running. And the final days' laps raise questions as to how far behind Mercedes actually are.

How do you glean from that that I'm saying the Ferrari isn't quicker?

There is clearly the implication that perhaps Mercedes are holding something back, "the race sims show that Ferrari are quicker however the last minute display by Mercedes tends to show they are holding something back", I wouldn't call that an acknowledgement of Ferrari being quicker per se.

I thought the post where I categorically said that I thought Ferrari were quicker but the size of the gap is up for debate was pretty unambiguous, but if you'd rather infer meaning rather than take what was specifically stated then there's not a lot I can do about that. But I hope you understand that it makes conversations a little difficult when you insist on using your own interpretation rather than take what was actually said.

I would say it's not clear at all when insistence is being made that Mercedes is holding something back, it's countering the idea that it might be a large gap and it might only be a small gap from which then can be perceived that the gap is reasonably close?

It's just a general observation that giving Ferrari any sort of noticeable advantage seems not to be desirable?

My point of contention is the half second gap, which I do find to be hyperbolic. I think that's pretty clear from the above posts tbh and I don't see how you can deduce from that that I'm saying Ferrari isn't quicker at all, as you've claimed above.

Anyway, I don't want to go back and forth saying the same thing time and time again so if you choose to believe that disputing the half second gap equates to saying that Ferrari have no advantage at all then that's your choice, but for me I think that's egging the pudding and I don't believe the gap is quite that much. Which, in case the point is for some reason still unclear, still has Ferrari ahead.

In terms of general observation I'd suggest the desire here appears to be to paint Mercedes as as big an underdog as possible?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5244
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I think it's already started with the rejecting of Ferrari being the fastest car in winter testing despite that being the opinion of all the experts. :)


Who's done that?

Zoue wrote:
JN23 wrote:
1.16.221 for Hamilton on the C5s which is 0.003 slower than Vettel. Game on!

Yep, 0.5s slower my ar$e. Now we have the answer over whether or not they were playing mind games...

Zoue could just be questioning the size of the gap rather than rejecting the Ferrari being quicker tbf. I don't think its 0.5 either, the 0.2/0.3 I read from AMuS I think sounds more like it.

No he saw the C5 tyre gap of 0.003s and keeps posting like this has some special reference.


No it turns out he outright said Ferrari looked quicker so its strange to keep pretending otherwise when he's already shown you that he did indeed say that.

I'm sure there'll be lots of ambiguous stuff to argue over during the season but this is as cut and dry as it gets so its a little weird tbh.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 5:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7728
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Zoue could just be questioning the size of the gap rather than rejecting the Ferrari being quicker tbf. I don't think its 0.5 either, the 0.2/0.3 I read from AMuS I think sounds more like it.

No he saw the C5 tyre gap of 0.003s and keeps posting like this has some special reference.


No it turns out he outright said Ferrari looked quicker so its strange to keep pretending otherwise when he's already shown you that he did indeed say that.

I'm sure there'll be lots of ambiguous stuff to argue over during the season but this is as cut and dry as it gets so its a little weird tbh.

I agree with this, it's been pointed out repeatedly


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 6:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6940
Look at how planted this year's Ferrari is. Scary!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dP_8vldMB-8


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33076
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
There is clearly the implication that perhaps Mercedes are holding something back, "the race sims show that Ferrari are quicker however the last minute display by Mercedes tends to show they are holding something back", I wouldn't call that an acknowledgement of Ferrari being quicker per se.

I thought the post where I categorically said that I thought Ferrari were quicker but the size of the gap is up for debate was pretty unambiguous, but if you'd rather infer meaning rather than take what was specifically stated then there's not a lot I can do about that. But I hope you understand that it makes conversations a little difficult when you insist on using your own interpretation rather than take what was actually said.

I would say it's not clear at all when insistence is being made that Mercedes is holding something back, it's countering the idea that it might be a large gap and it might only be a small gap from which then can be perceived that the gap is reasonably close?

It's just a general observation that giving Ferrari any sort of noticeable advantage seems not to be desirable?

My point of contention is the half second gap, which I do find to be hyperbolic. I think that's pretty clear from the above posts tbh and I don't see how you can deduce from that that I'm saying Ferrari isn't quicker at all, as you've claimed above.

Anyway, I don't want to go back and forth saying the same thing time and time again so if you choose to believe that disputing the half second gap equates to saying that Ferrari have no advantage at all then that's your choice, but for me I think that's egging the pudding and I don't believe the gap is quite that much. Which, in case the point is for some reason still unclear, still has Ferrari ahead.

In terms of general observation I'd suggest the desire here appears to be to paint Mercedes as as big an underdog as possible?

Not at all I just repeat what I read, I'd rather it be Mercedes that were said to be quicker then I would be quietly fist pumping and not wanting to dispute that the actual size of the gap is too big, at the end of the day when the cars go racing the gap will be what it is, what difference does it make of how big an underdog Mercedes may appear in testing?

_________________
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: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 05, 2019 6:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
There is clearly the implication that perhaps Mercedes are holding something back, "the race sims show that Ferrari are quicker however the last minute display by Mercedes tends to show they are holding something back", I wouldn't call that an acknowledgement of Ferrari being quicker per se.

I thought the post where I categorically said that I thought Ferrari were quicker but the size of the gap is up for debate was pretty unambiguous, but if you'd rather infer meaning rather than take what was specifically stated then there's not a lot I can do about that. But I hope you understand that it makes conversations a little difficult when you insist on using your own interpretation rather than take what was actually said.

I would say it's not clear at all when insistence is being made that Mercedes is holding something back, it's countering the idea that it might be a large gap and it might only be a small gap from which then can be perceived that the gap is reasonably close?

It's just a general observation that giving Ferrari any sort of noticeable advantage seems not to be desirable?

My point of contention is the half second gap, which I do find to be hyperbolic. I think that's pretty clear from the above posts tbh and I don't see how you can deduce from that that I'm saying Ferrari isn't quicker at all, as you've claimed above.

Anyway, I don't want to go back and forth saying the same thing time and time again so if you choose to believe that disputing the half second gap equates to saying that Ferrari have no advantage at all then that's your choice, but for me I think that's egging the pudding and I don't believe the gap is quite that much. Which, in case the point is for some reason still unclear, still has Ferrari ahead.

In terms of general observation I'd suggest the desire here appears to be to paint Mercedes as as big an underdog as possible?

Not at all I just repeat what I read, I'd rather it be Mercedes that were said to be quicker then I would be quietly fist pumping and not wanting to dispute that the actual size of the gap is too big, at the end of the day when the cars go racing the gap will be what it is, what difference does it make of how big an underdog Mercedes may appear in testing?
About as much as having Ferrari have a noticeable advantage in testing, I guess?

Agree that testing times can't be taken too seriously, which makes it all the more strange why I've had to spend the last page repeating that I think Ferrari are ahead so far...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am
Posts: 2932
pokerman wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
Riccardo's 'tonking' included eight retirements. I do believe that any of the top-level drivers could have won in that Mercedes. I'd also argue that a little more switched-on Ferrari team and Vettel (or other top driver) could have won in that Ferrari. The question I'd pose is - would they have?

Verstappen was basically always running in front of Ricciardo when he retired, regarding Mercedes and Ferrari who are these top drivers that are better than Hamilton or Vettel or are we theorising these two drivers being out of the picture?

I won't necessarily argue that Verstappen was faster than Riccardo; just took issue with the word 'tonking.'
Yes, I'd theorise Hamilton and Vettel being 'out of the picture' in terms of who could have won the 2018 WDC in the Mercedes (or even the Ferrari) and agree with Verstappen's assessment. Vettel could have been champion last year; a couple of silly driver errors and a couple of poor team calls add up to a missed opportunity. I'd guess that any top-tier driver could have won the 2018 title in either the Merc of Ferrari.

The performance gap between Verstappen and Ricciardo was similar to the gap we saw between Hamilton and Bottas, and between Vettel and Kimi, so for me tonking is well apt.

Theorising that any top driver could have won the titles in the Ferrari and Mercedes if both Hamilton and Vettel were out of the picture is true but then again is kind of missing the point that with top teams come top drivers.

In respect to Hamilton you can only really look to deride his title if you don't rate Vettel, in respect to Verstappen I would say he's basically the only driver who didn't have a fair chance in the field given his ability along with Alonso, but then how often has F1 ever given fair chance to all the drivers that deserved it in any given year, has Hamilton himself had fair chance every single year that he's completed in F1?

This is F1 and not a spec series, I understand the frustration of Verstappen but if the boot was on the other foot I doubt he would be so vocal about the inequalities?

I'm not sure that we'll reach a consensus on the 'tonking' so will let that drop...
I'm not seeking to downplay Hamilton's title; I'd argue that last year was one of his best seasons. Whilst the debate over which car from Mercedes or Ferrari was the better, it was the driver that ultimately made the difference. The same driver that, in my opinion, drove a very good 2009 without a car to challenge for the title and a very good 2012, with his team effectively letting him down (we're all human, though, and 2011 did also happen!).
I'm also suggesting that if Vettel had been more mistake-free, if Hamilton and Vettel had swapped cars, if either had swapped cars with another from the likes of Verstappen, Alonso, even Riccardo (and, perhaps one or two others), we may have had a different champion. These are all massive ifs!

_________________
Where I'm going, I don't need roads


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33076
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I thought the post where I categorically said that I thought Ferrari were quicker but the size of the gap is up for debate was pretty unambiguous, but if you'd rather infer meaning rather than take what was specifically stated then there's not a lot I can do about that. But I hope you understand that it makes conversations a little difficult when you insist on using your own interpretation rather than take what was actually said.

I would say it's not clear at all when insistence is being made that Mercedes is holding something back, it's countering the idea that it might be a large gap and it might only be a small gap from which then can be perceived that the gap is reasonably close?

It's just a general observation that giving Ferrari any sort of noticeable advantage seems not to be desirable?

My point of contention is the half second gap, which I do find to be hyperbolic. I think that's pretty clear from the above posts tbh and I don't see how you can deduce from that that I'm saying Ferrari isn't quicker at all, as you've claimed above.

Anyway, I don't want to go back and forth saying the same thing time and time again so if you choose to believe that disputing the half second gap equates to saying that Ferrari have no advantage at all then that's your choice, but for me I think that's egging the pudding and I don't believe the gap is quite that much. Which, in case the point is for some reason still unclear, still has Ferrari ahead.

In terms of general observation I'd suggest the desire here appears to be to paint Mercedes as as big an underdog as possible?

Not at all I just repeat what I read, I'd rather it be Mercedes that were said to be quicker then I would be quietly fist pumping and not wanting to dispute that the actual size of the gap is too big, at the end of the day when the cars go racing the gap will be what it is, what difference does it make of how big an underdog Mercedes may appear in testing?
About as much as having Ferrari have a noticeable advantage in testing, I guess?

Agree that testing times can't be taken too seriously, which makes it all the more strange why I've had to spend the last page repeating that I think Ferrari are ahead so far...

In respect to this thread it was said it's now done and dusted, let's wait for the 2019 season to start now to which I replied it looks like it's started already in the 2019 winter testing thread seeing how irate you was getting over the performance gap between Ferrari and Mercedes, and despite you saying that you accepted Ferrari being quicker you did initially put a lot of weight on the headline times set on the C5 tyres by Hamilton this being only 0.003s slower than Vettel on C5 tyres.

_________________
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: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33076
tootsie323 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
Riccardo's 'tonking' included eight retirements. I do believe that any of the top-level drivers could have won in that Mercedes. I'd also argue that a little more switched-on Ferrari team and Vettel (or other top driver) could have won in that Ferrari. The question I'd pose is - would they have?

Verstappen was basically always running in front of Ricciardo when he retired, regarding Mercedes and Ferrari who are these top drivers that are better than Hamilton or Vettel or are we theorising these two drivers being out of the picture?

I won't necessarily argue that Verstappen was faster than Riccardo; just took issue with the word 'tonking.'
Yes, I'd theorise Hamilton and Vettel being 'out of the picture' in terms of who could have won the 2018 WDC in the Mercedes (or even the Ferrari) and agree with Verstappen's assessment. Vettel could have been champion last year; a couple of silly driver errors and a couple of poor team calls add up to a missed opportunity. I'd guess that any top-tier driver could have won the 2018 title in either the Merc of Ferrari.

The performance gap between Verstappen and Ricciardo was similar to the gap we saw between Hamilton and Bottas, and between Vettel and Kimi, so for me tonking is well apt.

Theorising that any top driver could have won the titles in the Ferrari and Mercedes if both Hamilton and Vettel were out of the picture is true but then again is kind of missing the point that with top teams come top drivers.

In respect to Hamilton you can only really look to deride his title if you don't rate Vettel, in respect to Verstappen I would say he's basically the only driver who didn't have a fair chance in the field given his ability along with Alonso, but then how often has F1 ever given fair chance to all the drivers that deserved it in any given year, has Hamilton himself had fair chance every single year that he's completed in F1?

This is F1 and not a spec series, I understand the frustration of Verstappen but if the boot was on the other foot I doubt he would be so vocal about the inequalities?

I'm not sure that we'll reach a consensus on the 'tonking' so will let that drop...
I'm not seeking to downplay Hamilton's title; I'd argue that last year was one of his best seasons. Whilst the debate over which car from Mercedes or Ferrari was the better, it was the driver that ultimately made the difference. The same driver that, in my opinion, drove a very good 2009 without a car to challenge for the title and a very good 2012, with his team effectively letting him down (we're all human, though, and 2011 did also happen!).
I'm also suggesting that if Vettel had been more mistake-free, if Hamilton and Vettel had swapped cars, if either had swapped cars with another from the likes of Verstappen, Alonso, even Riccardo (and, perhaps one or two others), we may have had a different champion. These are all massive ifs!

Well tonking is just subjective for me it just means well beaten.

Whereas you can theorise about what Verstappen and Alonso could have been champion if they swapped with either Hamilton or Vettel I would give a pass on any others being classed as elite drivers that would have got the job done.

Regarding Vettel he was getting beat at a time in the season when he was in the better/faster Ferrari so how does he perform better in the Mercedes?

At the end of the season he was well beaten in what are seen as close to equal cars, swapping cars doesn't change that if one is seen as good as another.

_________________
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: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33076
Zoue wrote:
I don't think you did, no. I'm asking what you feel is the criteria for a car to be considered equal to another and you haven't answered that. I've stated on multiple occasions that I think cars are too close to be able to exclude the driver from the equation so I'm comfortable that I'm not one who has to have one car better than the other all the time. But I don't think the reverse is true and the example I gave of Bahrain 2018 seems to prove that. I've called them close but you're insisting that Ferrari held the advantage. Just over two tenths separated the top four in qualifying so I'm curious what your thought processes are.

You ask me what the criteria is when it's you yourself that sets the citerias that then seem to change with the wind.

Look you don't really want to answer why your criteria yet again changes when you overlook the superior PU of Ferrari in 2018 after this was your key point to determine that Mercedes were better in 2017.

Another thing that changes is the qualifying criteria, 2 tenths is close in Bahrain 2018 but 2 tenths in Spa 2017 indicates that the Mercedes was the better car.

_________________
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: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I would say it's not clear at all when insistence is being made that Mercedes is holding something back, it's countering the idea that it might be a large gap and it might only be a small gap from which then can be perceived that the gap is reasonably close?

It's just a general observation that giving Ferrari any sort of noticeable advantage seems not to be desirable?

My point of contention is the half second gap, which I do find to be hyperbolic. I think that's pretty clear from the above posts tbh and I don't see how you can deduce from that that I'm saying Ferrari isn't quicker at all, as you've claimed above.

Anyway, I don't want to go back and forth saying the same thing time and time again so if you choose to believe that disputing the half second gap equates to saying that Ferrari have no advantage at all then that's your choice, but for me I think that's egging the pudding and I don't believe the gap is quite that much. Which, in case the point is for some reason still unclear, still has Ferrari ahead.

In terms of general observation I'd suggest the desire here appears to be to paint Mercedes as as big an underdog as possible?

Not at all I just repeat what I read, I'd rather it be Mercedes that were said to be quicker then I would be quietly fist pumping and not wanting to dispute that the actual size of the gap is too big, at the end of the day when the cars go racing the gap will be what it is, what difference does it make of how big an underdog Mercedes may appear in testing?
About as much as having Ferrari have a noticeable advantage in testing, I guess?

Agree that testing times can't be taken too seriously, which makes it all the more strange why I've had to spend the last page repeating that I think Ferrari are ahead so far...

In respect to this thread it was said it's now done and dusted, let's wait for the 2019 season to start now to which I replied it looks like it's started already in the 2019 winter testing thread seeing how irate you was getting over the performance gap between Ferrari and Mercedes, and despite you saying that you accepted Ferrari being quicker you did initially put a lot of weight on the headline times set on the C5 tyres by Hamilton this being only 0.003s slower than Vettel on C5 tyres.

Erm, I don't believe I was getting irate at the performance gap? I think you may have your wires crossed. I don't want to get silly about it but it's not me that's trying to second guess anybody else's views here and you're the one who seems intent on reading between the mythical lines of others' responses. Even with this last exchange on the one hand you say it's all done and dusted while on the other you try and get a dig in about my views on the C5 tyre. Just why exactly is this so upsetting to you?

I've stated I think the fact that Hamilton and Vettel were so close on the C5s shows that Mercedes isn't in quite as much trouble as previously thought. I don't see how this is a contentious view, given that they were separated by 3 thousandths of a second :? Are we supposed to pretend it never happened? The only point I disagree with is the size of the gap and I'm sorry but I can't help it if that is unpalatable for you.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I don't think you did, no. I'm asking what you feel is the criteria for a car to be considered equal to another and you haven't answered that. I've stated on multiple occasions that I think cars are too close to be able to exclude the driver from the equation so I'm comfortable that I'm not one who has to have one car better than the other all the time. But I don't think the reverse is true and the example I gave of Bahrain 2018 seems to prove that. I've called them close but you're insisting that Ferrari held the advantage. Just over two tenths separated the top four in qualifying so I'm curious what your thought processes are.

You ask me what the criteria is when it's you yourself that sets the citerias that then seem to change with the wind.

Look you don't really want to answer why your criteria yet again changes when you overlook the superior PU of Ferrari in 2018 after this was your key point to determine that Mercedes were better in 2017.

Another thing that changes is the qualifying criteria, 2 tenths is close in Bahrain 2018 but 2 tenths in Spa 2017 indicates that the Mercedes was the better car.

That's not really true, though, is it? The gap between Hamilton and Kimi at Spa 2017 was more than 7 tenths. The point about Bahrain 2018 was that all four drivers were very tightly grouped. So no criteria have changed from my side. In fact, I went back though the race thread for Bahrain and I said I thought the cars were closely matched, so what's changed exactly?

I've answered your questions. I find it a little puzzling that you are avoiding saying what would be required to declare the cars equal in your opinion. Almost like you don't know.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33076
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
My point of contention is the half second gap, which I do find to be hyperbolic. I think that's pretty clear from the above posts tbh and I don't see how you can deduce from that that I'm saying Ferrari isn't quicker at all, as you've claimed above.

Anyway, I don't want to go back and forth saying the same thing time and time again so if you choose to believe that disputing the half second gap equates to saying that Ferrari have no advantage at all then that's your choice, but for me I think that's egging the pudding and I don't believe the gap is quite that much. Which, in case the point is for some reason still unclear, still has Ferrari ahead.

In terms of general observation I'd suggest the desire here appears to be to paint Mercedes as as big an underdog as possible?

Not at all I just repeat what I read, I'd rather it be Mercedes that were said to be quicker then I would be quietly fist pumping and not wanting to dispute that the actual size of the gap is too big, at the end of the day when the cars go racing the gap will be what it is, what difference does it make of how big an underdog Mercedes may appear in testing?
About as much as having Ferrari have a noticeable advantage in testing, I guess?

Agree that testing times can't be taken too seriously, which makes it all the more strange why I've had to spend the last page repeating that I think Ferrari are ahead so far...

In respect to this thread it was said it's now done and dusted, let's wait for the 2019 season to start now to which I replied it looks like it's started already in the 2019 winter testing thread seeing how irate you was getting over the performance gap between Ferrari and Mercedes, and despite you saying that you accepted Ferrari being quicker you did initially put a lot of weight on the headline times set on the C5 tyres by Hamilton this being only 0.003s slower than Vettel on C5 tyres.

Erm, I don't believe I was getting irate at the performance gap? I think you may have your wires crossed. I don't want to get silly about it but it's not me that's trying to second guess anybody else's views here and you're the one who seems intent on reading between the mythical lines of others' responses. Even with this last exchange on the one hand you say it's all done and dusted while on the other you try and get a dig in about my views on the C5 tyre. Just why exactly is this so upsetting to you?

I've stated I think the fact that Hamilton and Vettel were so close on the C5s shows that Mercedes isn't in quite as much trouble as previously thought. I don't see how this is a contentious view, given that they were separated by 3 thousandths of a second :? Are we supposed to pretend it never happened? The only point I disagree with is the size of the gap and I'm sorry but I can't help it if that is unpalatable for you.

Zoue wrote:
JN23 wrote:
1.16.221 for Hamilton on the C5s which is 0.003 slower than Vettel. Game on!

Yep, 0.5s slower my ar$e. Now we have the answer over whether or not they were playing mind games...

This was your actual response, that's someone being quite heated over what is merely testing and a lap time that actually didn't mean that much when you consider that Vettel did a 1-16.7 on C3 tyres, but then you felt the need to conjure up that different cars do better on different tyres in order to dismiss Vettel's time, again seemingly important to play down how good the Ferrari is or might be perceived.

Look if you don't want to answer what I said about the 2018 Ferrari PU then fair enough, and in that case I don't want to keep having to answer your questions to divert away from you answering, so let's leave it at that.

_________________
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: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33076
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I don't think you did, no. I'm asking what you feel is the criteria for a car to be considered equal to another and you haven't answered that. I've stated on multiple occasions that I think cars are too close to be able to exclude the driver from the equation so I'm comfortable that I'm not one who has to have one car better than the other all the time. But I don't think the reverse is true and the example I gave of Bahrain 2018 seems to prove that. I've called them close but you're insisting that Ferrari held the advantage. Just over two tenths separated the top four in qualifying so I'm curious what your thought processes are.

You ask me what the criteria is when it's you yourself that sets the citerias that then seem to change with the wind.

Look you don't really want to answer why your criteria yet again changes when you overlook the superior PU of Ferrari in 2018 after this was your key point to determine that Mercedes were better in 2017.

Another thing that changes is the qualifying criteria, 2 tenths is close in Bahrain 2018 but 2 tenths in Spa 2017 indicates that the Mercedes was the better car.

That's not really true, though, is it? The gap between Hamilton and Kimi at Spa 2017 was more than 7 tenths. The point about Bahrain 2018 was that all four drivers were very tightly grouped. So no criteria have changed from my side. In fact, I went back though the race thread for Bahrain and I said I thought the cars were closely matched, so what's changed exactly?

I've answered your questions. I find it a little puzzling that you are avoiding saying what would be required to declare the cars equal in your opinion. Almost like you don't know.

Bottas was only 2 tenths quicker than Kimi and 3 tenths slower than Vettel, if we are going to use Kimi as a barameter of Ferrari performance then I'll start using Bottas as a parameter of Mercedes performance and see how that works out, it just circles back to the Mercedes being 2 tenths quicker, 7 tenths is some kind of red herring.

In Bahrain 2018 you say the cars were closely matched, Spa 2017 was a reverse scenario were you stated that Mercedes was better because it was quicker in qualifying.

_________________
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: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 4:37 pm
Posts: 588
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I don't think you did, no. I'm asking what you feel is the criteria for a car to be considered equal to another and you haven't answered that. I've stated on multiple occasions that I think cars are too close to be able to exclude the driver from the equation so I'm comfortable that I'm not one who has to have one car better than the other all the time. But I don't think the reverse is true and the example I gave of Bahrain 2018 seems to prove that. I've called them close but you're insisting that Ferrari held the advantage. Just over two tenths separated the top four in qualifying so I'm curious what your thought processes are.

You ask me what the criteria is when it's you yourself that sets the citerias that then seem to change with the wind.

Look you don't really want to answer why your criteria yet again changes when you overlook the superior PU of Ferrari in 2018 after this was your key point to determine that Mercedes were better in 2017.

Another thing that changes is the qualifying criteria, 2 tenths is close in Bahrain 2018 but 2 tenths in Spa 2017 indicates that the Mercedes was the better car.

That's not really true, though, is it? The gap between Hamilton and Kimi at Spa 2017 was more than 7 tenths. The point about Bahrain 2018 was that all four drivers were very tightly grouped. So no criteria have changed from my side. In fact, I went back though the race thread for Bahrain and I said I thought the cars were closely matched, so what's changed exactly?

I've answered your questions. I find it a little puzzling that you are avoiding saying what would be required to declare the cars equal in your opinion. Almost like you don't know.


Didn't Räikkönen make a mistake on his flying lap? I think he ran wide over the Liege kerb- this effectively destroying his lap?


" I felt we had all the tools to do well, the car was good and we had the speed. In the last run I was off to a good start, but then I started struggling with the tire temperatures and made a mistake, got sideways at turn 9 and it was pretty much the end of it. " ( Räikkönen)

_________________
You just need to be accepted for who you are and be proud of who you are and that is what I'm trying to do.
Lewis Hamilton


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7728
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Not at all I just repeat what I read, I'd rather it be Mercedes that were said to be quicker then I would be quietly fist pumping and not wanting to dispute that the actual size of the gap is too big, at the end of the day when the cars go racing the gap will be what it is, what difference does it make of how big an underdog Mercedes may appear in testing?
About as much as having Ferrari have a noticeable advantage in testing, I guess?

Agree that testing times can't be taken too seriously, which makes it all the more strange why I've had to spend the last page repeating that I think Ferrari are ahead so far...

In respect to this thread it was said it's now done and dusted, let's wait for the 2019 season to start now to which I replied it looks like it's started already in the 2019 winter testing thread seeing how irate you was getting over the performance gap between Ferrari and Mercedes, and despite you saying that you accepted Ferrari being quicker you did initially put a lot of weight on the headline times set on the C5 tyres by Hamilton this being only 0.003s slower than Vettel on C5 tyres.

Erm, I don't believe I was getting irate at the performance gap? I think you may have your wires crossed. I don't want to get silly about it but it's not me that's trying to second guess anybody else's views here and you're the one who seems intent on reading between the mythical lines of others' responses. Even with this last exchange on the one hand you say it's all done and dusted while on the other you try and get a dig in about my views on the C5 tyre. Just why exactly is this so upsetting to you?

I've stated I think the fact that Hamilton and Vettel were so close on the C5s shows that Mercedes isn't in quite as much trouble as previously thought. I don't see how this is a contentious view, given that they were separated by 3 thousandths of a second :? Are we supposed to pretend it never happened? The only point I disagree with is the size of the gap and I'm sorry but I can't help it if that is unpalatable for you.

Zoue wrote:
JN23 wrote:
1.16.221 for Hamilton on the C5s which is 0.003 slower than Vettel. Game on!

Yep, 0.5s slower my ar$e. Now we have the answer over whether or not they were playing mind games...

This was your actual response, that's someone being quite heated over what is merely testing and a lap time that actually didn't mean that much when you consider that Vettel did a 1-16.7 on C3 tyres, but then you felt the need to conjure up that different cars do better on different tyres in order to dismiss Vettel's time, again seemingly important to play down how good the Ferrari is or might be perceived.

Look if you don't want to answer what I said about the 2018 Ferrari PU then fair enough, and in that case I don't want to keep having to answer your questions to divert away from you answering, so let's leave it at that.

I think it is fairly simple what Zoue said, you are reading too much into it. When the two top teams post the same time in the fastest tyre on light fuel (I believe it was short light runs for both of them), you can't get a better comparison reading than that.

Vettel did that C3 time, which is very impressive, but that is impressive using a tyre compound correction, which is not an exact science itself.

So here's a little snippet from the horse's mouth, showing how his own assessment of half a second may just be loads of bull:

"As Hamilton himself had earlier noted, "Testing is testing. We don't know because everyone has different engine modes and fuel loads. It will be four races before we really know where we stand.""


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I don't think you did, no. I'm asking what you feel is the criteria for a car to be considered equal to another and you haven't answered that. I've stated on multiple occasions that I think cars are too close to be able to exclude the driver from the equation so I'm comfortable that I'm not one who has to have one car better than the other all the time. But I don't think the reverse is true and the example I gave of Bahrain 2018 seems to prove that. I've called them close but you're insisting that Ferrari held the advantage. Just over two tenths separated the top four in qualifying so I'm curious what your thought processes are.

You ask me what the criteria is when it's you yourself that sets the citerias that then seem to change with the wind.

Look you don't really want to answer why your criteria yet again changes when you overlook the superior PU of Ferrari in 2018 after this was your key point to determine that Mercedes were better in 2017.

Another thing that changes is the qualifying criteria, 2 tenths is close in Bahrain 2018 but 2 tenths in Spa 2017 indicates that the Mercedes was the better car.

That's not really true, though, is it? The gap between Hamilton and Kimi at Spa 2017 was more than 7 tenths. The point about Bahrain 2018 was that all four drivers were very tightly grouped. So no criteria have changed from my side. In fact, I went back though the race thread for Bahrain and I said I thought the cars were closely matched, so what's changed exactly?

I've answered your questions. I find it a little puzzling that you are avoiding saying what would be required to declare the cars equal in your opinion. Almost like you don't know.

Bottas was only 2 tenths quicker than Kimi and 3 tenths slower than Vettel, if we are going to use Kimi as a barameter of Ferrari performance then I'll start using Bottas as a parameter of Mercedes performance and see how that works out, it just circles back to the Mercedes being 2 tenths quicker, 7 tenths is some kind of red herring.

In Bahrain 2018 you say the cars were closely matched, Spa 2017 was a reverse scenario were you stated that Mercedes was better because it was quicker in qualifying.

I'm trying to work out if you're being deliberately difficult here. Bahrain 2018 and Spa 2017 are NOTHING like one another. In the former, all the drivers were very close to one another, while in the other they were spread out. In no universe could it be called a reverse of anything. Your responses are bizarre.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am
Posts: 2932
pokerman wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Verstappen was basically always running in front of Ricciardo when he retired, regarding Mercedes and Ferrari who are these top drivers that are better than Hamilton or Vettel or are we theorising these two drivers being out of the picture?

I won't necessarily argue that Verstappen was faster than Riccardo; just took issue with the word 'tonking.'
Yes, I'd theorise Hamilton and Vettel being 'out of the picture' in terms of who could have won the 2018 WDC in the Mercedes (or even the Ferrari) and agree with Verstappen's assessment. Vettel could have been champion last year; a couple of silly driver errors and a couple of poor team calls add up to a missed opportunity. I'd guess that any top-tier driver could have won the 2018 title in either the Merc of Ferrari.

The performance gap between Verstappen and Ricciardo was similar to the gap we saw between Hamilton and Bottas, and between Vettel and Kimi, so for me tonking is well apt.

Theorising that any top driver could have won the titles in the Ferrari and Mercedes if both Hamilton and Vettel were out of the picture is true but then again is kind of missing the point that with top teams come top drivers.

In respect to Hamilton you can only really look to deride his title if you don't rate Vettel, in respect to Verstappen I would say he's basically the only driver who didn't have a fair chance in the field given his ability along with Alonso, but then how often has F1 ever given fair chance to all the drivers that deserved it in any given year, has Hamilton himself had fair chance every single year that he's completed in F1?

This is F1 and not a spec series, I understand the frustration of Verstappen but if the boot was on the other foot I doubt he would be so vocal about the inequalities?

I'm not sure that we'll reach a consensus on the 'tonking' so will let that drop...
I'm not seeking to downplay Hamilton's title; I'd argue that last year was one of his best seasons. Whilst the debate over which car from Mercedes or Ferrari was the better, it was the driver that ultimately made the difference. The same driver that, in my opinion, drove a very good 2009 without a car to challenge for the title and a very good 2012, with his team effectively letting him down (we're all human, though, and 2011 did also happen!).
I'm also suggesting that if Vettel had been more mistake-free, if Hamilton and Vettel had swapped cars, if either had swapped cars with another from the likes of Verstappen, Alonso, even Riccardo (and, perhaps one or two others), we may have had a different champion. These are all massive ifs!

Well tonking is just subjective for me it just means well beaten.

Whereas you can theorise about what Verstappen and Alonso could have been champion if they swapped with either Hamilton or Vettel I would give a pass on any others being classed as elite drivers that would have got the job done.

Regarding Vettel he was getting beat at a time in the season when he was in the better/faster Ferrari so how does he perform better in the Mercedes?

At the end of the season he was well beaten in what are seen as close to equal cars, swapping cars doesn't change that if one is seen as good as another.

My argument was that a mistake-free Vettel would have ran the title challenge a lot closer, perhaps even come out on top - in either car. The same could equally be argued for Hamilton in the Ferrari, if we talk about a straight swap.
Assuming that the cars were pretty much equal across the season, it came down to who didn't make the mistakes (I'll include the teams in this: Ferrari made a couple of bad calls and Mercedes were not totally perfect either).
Personally, take all that away I would narrowly favour Hamilton to win. I certainly would not write off Vettel (and, in similar circumstances, one or two others if we out them into that mix) though.

_________________
Where I'm going, I don't need roads


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 4:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Not at all I just repeat what I read, I'd rather it be Mercedes that were said to be quicker then I would be quietly fist pumping and not wanting to dispute that the actual size of the gap is too big, at the end of the day when the cars go racing the gap will be what it is, what difference does it make of how big an underdog Mercedes may appear in testing?
About as much as having Ferrari have a noticeable advantage in testing, I guess?

Agree that testing times can't be taken too seriously, which makes it all the more strange why I've had to spend the last page repeating that I think Ferrari are ahead so far...

In respect to this thread it was said it's now done and dusted, let's wait for the 2019 season to start now to which I replied it looks like it's started already in the 2019 winter testing thread seeing how irate you was getting over the performance gap between Ferrari and Mercedes, and despite you saying that you accepted Ferrari being quicker you did initially put a lot of weight on the headline times set on the C5 tyres by Hamilton this being only 0.003s slower than Vettel on C5 tyres.

Erm, I don't believe I was getting irate at the performance gap? I think you may have your wires crossed. I don't want to get silly about it but it's not me that's trying to second guess anybody else's views here and you're the one who seems intent on reading between the mythical lines of others' responses. Even with this last exchange on the one hand you say it's all done and dusted while on the other you try and get a dig in about my views on the C5 tyre. Just why exactly is this so upsetting to you?

I've stated I think the fact that Hamilton and Vettel were so close on the C5s shows that Mercedes isn't in quite as much trouble as previously thought. I don't see how this is a contentious view, given that they were separated by 3 thousandths of a second :? Are we supposed to pretend it never happened? The only point I disagree with is the size of the gap and I'm sorry but I can't help it if that is unpalatable for you.

Zoue wrote:
JN23 wrote:
1.16.221 for Hamilton on the C5s which is 0.003 slower than Vettel. Game on!

Yep, 0.5s slower my ar$e. Now we have the answer over whether or not they were playing mind games...

This was your actual response, that's someone being quite heated over what is merely testing and a lap time that actually didn't mean that much when you consider that Vettel did a 1-16.7 on C3 tyres, but then you felt the need to conjure up that different cars do better on different tyres in order to dismiss Vettel's time, again seemingly important to play down how good the Ferrari is or might be perceived.

Look if you don't want to answer what I said about the 2018 Ferrari PU then fair enough, and in that case I don't want to keep having to answer your questions to divert away from you answering, so let's leave it at that.

I'm sorry, but I think you are being somewhat disingenuous here. I asked the original question regarding how close cars have to be to be considered equal and you asked yours after that in order to divert away from having to answer, so I think it's a little cheeky for you to try to pin that one on me. This isn't the first time this has happened and doubtless it won't be the last but please at least be honest about it and don't try and pass the buck. I have answered some of the questions but I don't see why you get a free pass on having to answer while I have to go into detail on every point you raise in response.

Now regarding the comment above, it depends how you read it. I was being tongue in cheek and "irate" is perhaps a bit strong. Posting a near-identical lap time does lend itself to questions on how big the gap actually is. This seems to be an issue with you, so I'd suggest it's you that's the irate one here based on all these posts where it's clear challenging Hamilton's remarks rankles with you.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 07, 2019 7:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9920
This forum is so tiresome these days mostly thanks to the (lack of) debating skills of one member... there I've said it. We get countless pages of debate over some minute details of what someone has once said. This quest for consensus over how great and unfairly treated and disadvantaged a certain driver is will never end it seems...

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 07, 2019 10:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7728
Covalent wrote:
This forum is so tiresome these days mostly thanks to the (lack of) debating skills of one member... there I've said it. We get countless pages of debate over some minute details of what someone has once said. This quest for consensus over how great and unfairly treated and disadvantaged a certain driver is will never end it seems...

Amen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 3:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 1293
Either Vettel backed off or Mercedes is much better in slower corners. Vettel was 0.3 as he approached the Chicane.

Best lap comparison with delta, Hamilton vs Vettel.

https://streamable.com/mml18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 5:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 7402
Location: Michigan, USA
Johnson wrote:
Either Vettel backed off or Mercedes is much better in slower corners.

Or Hamilton is better in slower corners. 8)

In all seriousness, Hamilton's is a better lap. Look from 0:56 on, Vettel's exit from turn 11 and entry to turn 12; he doesn't hug the inside tightly like Lewis does, and loses speed as a result. Then from turn 13 to 15 his line is sloppy, never quite going from apex to outside and back; Lewis clips each corner perfectly, and by the end of the sequence has made up the 3 tenths.

It's possible that the Ferrari suffers from understeer in slow corners - you can see it push out a bit at turn 5 as well - but also possible that Vettel just had a worse lap.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion | #2 in the world in 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 10:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
Posts: 777
Covalent wrote:
This forum is so tiresome these days mostly thanks to the (lack of) debating skills of one member... there I've said it. We get countless pages of debate over some minute details of what someone has once said. This quest for consensus over how great and unfairly treated and disadvantaged a certain driver is will never end it seems...


I'd argue it takes two to tango.
When debating with a certain poster, whose main skill sets are regurgitating the same point into as many different sentences they can and a single minded determination to have the last post every time, it's difficult not to see these circular arguments.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 11:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7728
Laz_T800 wrote:
Covalent wrote:
This forum is so tiresome these days mostly thanks to the (lack of) debating skills of one member... there I've said it. We get countless pages of debate over some minute details of what someone has once said. This quest for consensus over how great and unfairly treated and disadvantaged a certain driver is will never end it seems...


I'd argue it takes two to tango.
When debating with a certain poster, whose main skill sets are regurgitating the same point into as many different sentences they can and a single minded determination to have the last post every time, it's difficult not to see these circular arguments.

Fair comment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 12:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33076
Given the discord I will leave things at that, in respect to this thread going forward I welcome all fair and balanced posts.

_________________
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: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3849
Johnson wrote:
Either Vettel backed off or Mercedes is much better in slower corners. Vettel was 0.3 as he approached the Chicane.

Best lap comparison with delta, Hamilton vs Vettel.

https://streamable.com/mml18



From my untrained eye Hamilton has an oversteer moment out of turn 6 or into turn 7. Vettel's car was planted all through the lap and he never had to make any steering corrections. Without that moment I think Hamilton would have beaten Vettel's lap time pretty handily. But it does seem that the Merc is harder to drive in this video.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7728
kleefton wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Either Vettel backed off or Mercedes is much better in slower corners. Vettel was 0.3 as he approached the Chicane.

Best lap comparison with delta, Hamilton vs Vettel.

https://streamable.com/mml18



From my untrained eye Hamilton has an oversteer moment out of turn 6 or into turn 7. Vettel's car was planted all through the lap and he never had to make any steering corrections. Without that moment I think Hamilton would have beaten Vettel's lap time pretty handily. But it does seem that the Merc is harder to drive in this video.

I agree, Hamilton was the only one who had to correct ever so slightly. Whether the Ferrari looked planted or not, it seems that Vettel had to go a bit further on the curbs, further outside than Hamilton. Maybe I'm mistaken or confused with the two videos side by side


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 3:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3849
Siao7 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Either Vettel backed off or Mercedes is much better in slower corners. Vettel was 0.3 as he approached the Chicane.

Best lap comparison with delta, Hamilton vs Vettel.

https://streamable.com/mml18



From my untrained eye Hamilton has an oversteer moment out of turn 6 or into turn 7. Vettel's car was planted all through the lap and he never had to make any steering corrections. Without that moment I think Hamilton would have beaten Vettel's lap time pretty handily. But it does seem that the Merc is harder to drive in this video.

I agree, Hamilton was the only one who had to correct ever so slightly. Whether the Ferrari looked planted or not, it seems that Vettel had to go a bit further on the curbs, further outside than Hamilton. Maybe I'm mistaken or confused with the two videos side by side


Yeah i think going wide has been a staple of vettels driving style since probably his karting days. He likes to use every single inch of the track on exit more than any other driver.


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: Black_Flag_11, Blake, TheGiantHogweed 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