planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Dec 19, 2018 3:33 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic

Is there a clear winner between Hamilton and Vettel as drivers?
Hamilton is clearly better at this point. 81%  81%  [ 70 ]
Vettel is clearly better at this point. 1%  1%  [ 1 ]
It is still not clear who is the better driver at this point. 17%  17%  [ 15 ]
Total votes : 86
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 7:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23943
Dash33 wrote:
j man wrote:
For me the main reason why I would rate Alonso a nudge above Hamilton is consistency. Hamilton on top form is untouchable, but he also has a few weekends per year where he's just nowhere. I don't think Alonso would have struggled like Hamilton did in China and Canada this year for instance. Nor would he have crashed out in Brazil qualifying last year. On the other hand I don't think he would have been capable of the qualifying lap that Hamilton did last weekend, but for me consistency trumps those special flashes of brilliance when it comes to sustaining a championship challenge and I've never seen any other driver from this generation with the same ability that Alonso has to extract the absolute maximum from the car in every race.


By consistency do you mean consistently setting pole positions, winning races and championships?

Given Alonso's not in the car to be able to do that, I'd suggest the answer to that might be no?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 7:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5024
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:


Firstly, I was talking about comparable cars and yes it's just one element but it's a pretty important one. I did say points don't tell the whole story as well which is why I also talked about who I felt performed better and pointed out for example 2010 I felt Lewis got the better of it, irrespective of what the points said. But I also think the other years Alonso did have the edge on performance to go along with the points "win" which is why I mentioned it. If it was just about the points then I wouldn't mention it for some of the reasons given or I'd see it the other way like in 2010.

Secondly whether you like Hughes's piece or not doesn't mean it's not worth mentioning in a discussion involving what the article is specifically about. He states the info comes from the teams and only counts direct comparisons which seems fair enough to me. It's a lot fairer than pointing to poles which include the likes of Silverstone where Alonso was 4ths faster fuel corrected. If it was your turn for the preferential fuel strategy on a McLaren track, you got the pole. If it was your turn on a Ferrari track, you didn't. At least Hughes makes the attempt to keep it fair and use the fuel corrected results in directly comparable situations, for qualifying this means who got the better strategy is irrelevant as it's fuel corrected anyway. For the h2h though yeah the fuel preference makes a difference at the beginning of the season which is one of the reasons I don't think Alonso got the better of Lewis, quite the opposite. The point I'm making is the closeness of it whether we use the direct 2007 comparison or the only other 4 comparable seasons.

Thirdly, I don't know how many times I have to say it within one discussion but I'm not writing off or discounting Lewis's success in a dominant car, not even remotely so, I'm saying comparing his performance in a run in while in a dominant car in a two horse race and comparing it against a run in with the 2/3rd or 3rd/4th best car and increased competition is as lopsided a comparison as you can get with no wonder you get the impression you do from it.

Any form of fuel correction is an estimate and is not accurate and, if you actually pay attention to Hughes' methodology, it's highly questionable in terms of what he includes/excludes. Did you actually watch that season? If so, are you trying to tell me that you feel Alonso got the better of the matchup? I just want to know how absurd we're getting here with all due respect.

That's not even the important part anyway. I marvel at how people perceive drivers as having good or bad seasons without realizing that much of what they are noticing is directly linked to whether or not they have a tough teammate to fight with. The perception that Alonso was particularly great at Ferrari is completely tied to his 100% control over Felipe Massa. The notion that he struggled in 2007 is 100% tied to his battle with Lewis. Likewise most people perceive Hamilton to be at his absolute peak right now but that's also largely tied to the fact that Bottas poses no real threat to him. For the first time since 2009 he's actually able to maximize his strategy and he also has the team 100% behind him rather than the split camps he's been in most of his career with other world champions.

It's not a small thing at all. It's absolutely huge and I marvel at how few people seem to realize it. We've seen the Sergio Perez effect damage multiple careers of his teammates. We've seen Raikkonen go from seeming like the fastest driver in F1 to seeming like a complete slouch relative to the top guys. This is why I cannot put Schumacher on the same footing with Senna personally. His whole career he had #1 status. Michael never had to beat another top driver in the same car at any point in his career. Having a tough teammate is like having a computer virus. At the best of times it's an annoyance but at the worst of times it's outright disastrous.


The only absurd thing is how often I'm having to repeat myself and yes I'm aware of Hughes's methodology as I bothered to read the article before posting it as bizarre as that may sound and he explains it. He explains which ones he's left out and which sessions the data was taken from in the comments section and nothing jumps out as being fishy. You can obviously doubt him, that's your right of course. For the second time no, I don't think Alonso got the better of it in 2007, I do think it was as close as the stats suggest though and yes I was watching.

Having a comfortable team setting is very important I agree but no the perception Alonso's time at Ferrari being great isn't based on having control over Massa, at least not for me. It's based on his own performances during the time versus his main rivals more than any one single thing. I didn't need Button having a good season to tell me Lewis was on it in 2012 either. Drivers can have poorer seasons with a comfortable setting (2008) just as often as having a good one without (2012) in my experience. Other influences like the car's competitiveness and your rivals car competitiveness, where you are in the title picture and who you are fighting with are as big of influences on how a driver performs as his setting in the team imo but I do think it's important and the best way to approach this game for as long as it isn't a spec series, yeah.

You are debunking your own positions here somewhat. You claim Hamilton's 2008 season was worse than his 2012 season despite having a non-competitive teammate in 2008 vs having Button in 2012. I agree that Hamilton's performance was near flawless in 2012 and that 2008 was perhaps his second most mistake-prone season. I also think his car in 2008 was second best while the 2012 car was match for the Red Bull on pace. None the less, he won the championship in 2008 and did not win it in 2012. Now, before you say it; not winning in 2012 was not much about Button at all and it was a lot more about the team itself but the fact is that he managed to win a WDC in a scruffy season largely because the whole team was focused on getting him there.

The thing is that I actually do think having the team behind you and in sync with you brings out the best in your performance. I do think Hamilton is performing at his very best at the moment and that Alonso was at his best in those situations too. Having internal turmoil and camps forming, distrust and paranoia is not good for any driver. Having that 100% support and not having to watch your back regarding your teammate frees you to fully focus on beating everyone else without tripping on internal politics and while employing whatever strategy you want to. When you ignore things like getting preference on pitstop strategy instead of having to wait your turn or being able to keep your teammate out on track to slow down the other guys or force them to cover him or simply being able to move your teammate out of your way when he's ahead of you on track instead of having to fight him; you are ignoring a MASSIVE advantage.

In other words, the situations that Hamilton and Alonso found themselves in following their split as teammates were night and day different. They were not comparable at all. Alonso was on a team that was 100% committed to maximizing his chances in every race; even at the expense of his teammate. Hamilton was on a team that was committed to providing an equal opportunity for both former WDC drivers; even at the expense of maximizing Lewis's results. When you claimed that they had the same chance at beating Vettel, you completely missed the mark.


I'm really not, the point being made was about performance levels of the drivers in each of those years and how they corresponded to their team environment, not about their success achieved during those particular years. Success can be affected by too many outliers in a non-spec series like the things you mention that got in the way in 2012, namely team errors and a better driver in the better car he's chasing than in 2008, two things entirely out of his control and equally important as having the sole focus of the team. His out and out performance however was greater in 2012 and I don't think that's in doubt.


I still agree it's important yeah, I just don't think it's crucial to achieving your best performance. While I'd agree that Lewis is driving better now than in say 2014 when he was in a more tense environment, I don't think it's only to do with the atmosphere within the team and strategy preference etc.. The calibre of the driver he's up against swapping around (Seb and Nico) could've brought this level out of him. Having a fight with a different team when you don't know what each others car performance is going to be for sure could've brought it out of him. Being a 4x Champ instead of a 1x could've helped him reach a better place mentally in his approach now he's not chasing Seb's numbers and his numbers are so good. Age as touched on before could play a role. There's many things that impact a drivers performance I think.


Every bit as good a chance is an exaggeration tbf yeah but I did go on to say the points didn't tell the whole story and it was the cars I found comparable. Lewis obviously had the tougher internal battle but he also invariably had the quicker car over the same period which is still important for obvious reasons, it's not like it went south all the time and those times it didn't he had an advantage in pace. You're never going to get a perfect comparison even in the same team with reliability and things like that outside their control so comparable has to have some wiggle room. I think we'd both class last years title fight as comparable cars but I'm sure there are Ferrari fans who'd strongly disagree with me on that one too for reasons x,y and z.

_________________
"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: Tue Sep 18, 2018 7:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23943
Dash33 wrote:
The thing that Alonso couldn't do that Hamilton could is win 4 (maybe 5) championships, nearly 80 pole positions, 60 odd wins etc. The other thing he couldn't do is beat Hamilton when they were team mates, and Hamilton was a rookie at that. Look, I rate Alonso very highly and he may be the only driver who could give LH a run for his money. But over a career statistics really do count and Lewis is cementing his position as the greatest driver of his generation at the very least. Alonso isn't.

And Hamilton wouldn't have been able to do any of those things if he'd had the equipment Alonso had. If we were talking about who has achieved more, you'd have a point. But statistics without any context don't really count for all that much

edit for quotes


Last edited by Zoue on Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 11:49 am
Posts: 96
Zoue wrote:
Dash33 wrote:
It does. It moves him closer to Alonso IMO but as Alonso hasn't had the opportunity to do the same you can't compare. Why would you assume Alonso couldn't.

I also have to say I pretty much discount races and championships won between 2014-16 as any indication of greatness. No competition.

For me to put Hamilton ahead of Alonso he'd have to do things I don't think Alonso could do. That's a very high bar. I think with Hmilton's success you could argue he was "greater" but better? Not for me.


[b]The thing that Alonso couldn't do that Hamilton could is win 4 (maybe 5) championships, nearly 80 pole positions, 60 odd wins etc. The other thing he couldn't do is beat Hamilton when they were team mates, and Hamilton was a rookie at that. Look, I rate Alonso very highly and he may be the only driver who could give LH a run for his money. But over a career statistics really do count and Lewis is cementing his position as the greatest driver of his generation at the very least. Alonso isn't. And Hamilton wouldn't have been able to do any of those things if he'd had the equipment Alonso had. If we were talking about who has achieved more, you'd have a point. But statistics without any context don't really count for all that much


We really do use such flawed logic to rate drivers. Championships alone is so misleading - Andrew Benson wrote an excellent article on BBC sport just after Alonso announced his retirement. In it he talked about how such minor things in the 2010 and 2012 seasons (none of which were Alonso's doing) saw him miss out. But for Ferraris strategy (2010) and Grosjean's idiocy (Spa 2012) it's highly likely we'd be talking about Alonso the 4 time champion and Vettel the double champion. And the debate about who is better, Vettel or Alonso, wouldn't even get off the ground. Yet we have the arguments mostly because of the title tally.

Another common point of reference is Hamilton as a 'Rookie' beating Alonso (on position count back I might add). We forget that Alonso himself was only 25 at the time. Drivers peak at different times, and I genuinely think Hamilton wouldn't have handled Alonso as his team mate 2010-2013. Alonso was just that good, and still is.

All that said, Hamilton is now driving at that Alonso level, but in a better car and the result is devastating. Unfortunately for Vettel, Hamilton is just a bit better. Vettel has had a comfortable career thus far, with an exceptional car and team at Red Bull for 5 seasons, and a great car, with not such as good team, for the last 2 seasons as well. His team mates in all honesty have been good drivers, but not great drivers. The only young hungry lion he came up against was DR and he struggled. I fear the same for Vettel next season, and the next 12 months could be make or break for his legacy.

It's all about fine margins and those minor things. In 3 years could we be talking about Vettel the 6 time champion who went up against and beat Hamilton? Or will we look back at a 4 time champion, who just fell short of Hamilton's ability and then got trounced by LeClerc....

All we can say is that right now, as of this day, Hamilton is driving better than Vettel.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:54 pm
Posts: 1036
Zoue wrote:
Dash33 wrote:
It does. It moves him closer to Alonso IMO but as Alonso hasn't had the opportunity to do the same you can't compare. Why would you assume Alonso couldn't.

I also have to say I pretty much discount races and championships won between 2014-16 as any indication of greatness. No competition.

For me to put Hamilton ahead of Alonso he'd have to do things I don't think Alonso could do. That's a very high bar. I think with Hmilton's success you could argue he was "greater" but better? Not for me.


The thing that Alonso couldn't do that Hamilton could is win 4 (maybe 5) championships, nearly 80 pole positions, 60 odd wins etc. The other thing he couldn't do is beat Hamilton when they were team mates, and Hamilton was a rookie at that. Look, I rate Alonso very highly and he may be the only driver who could give LH a run for his money. But over a career statistics really do count and Lewis is cementing his position as the greatest driver of his generation at the very least. Alonso isn't.

And Hamilton wouldn't have been able to do any of those things if he'd had the equipment Alonso had. If we were talking about who has achieved more, you'd have a point. But statistics without any context don't really count for all that much[/quote]

No but one statistic that does go in favour of Lewis is 2007. Rookie season putting up a fight with Fernando Alonso that was considered to be the greatest talent of our time along with Michael. It is rare for F1 rookies instantly perform against their highly talented team mates... it didn't just shock the teams nor the audiences but Fernando got a shock of his life. People can try and say "it's the car".... other team mates had access to race winning machinery and where are they? Not winning or not challenging for the championship. I'd love to see Lewis again paired with Fernando. But 2007 will always be the moment for Hamilton, one of the greatest drivers got put on the spot by a rookie.

I'd say this for Lewis, each time the detractors come out... he proves them wrong with actions not talk.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
Posts: 706
Not sure why Alonso's been brought into this debate, but here goes.

Alonso is one of the top drivers of the last 17 years but will never be above Lewis IMHO.
Lewis more than held his own when they were teammates, as a rookie no less.
Alonso gets far too much credit for beating a bunch of journeymen teammates over the years.
In the crunch situations he's been found wanting, Lewis has risen when under pressure and delivered time and again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23943
gregs51 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Dash33 wrote:
[b]The thing that Alonso couldn't do that Hamilton could is win 4 (maybe 5) championships, nearly 80 pole positions, 60 odd wins etc. The other thing he couldn't do is beat Hamilton when they were team mates, and Hamilton was a rookie at that. Look, I rate Alonso very highly and he may be the only driver who could give LH a run for his money. But over a career statistics really do count and Lewis is cementing his position as the greatest driver of his generation at the very least. Alonso isn't.
And Hamilton wouldn't have been able to do any of those things if he'd had the equipment Alonso had. If we were talking about who has achieved more, you'd have a point. But statistics without any context don't really count for all that much


We really do use such flawed logic to rate drivers. Championships alone is so misleading - Andrew Benson wrote an excellent article on BBC sport just after Alonso announced his retirement. In it he talked about how such minor things in the 2010 and 2012 seasons (none of which were Alonso's doing) saw him miss out. But for Ferraris strategy (2010) and Grosjean's idiocy (Spa 2012) it's highly likely we'd be talking about Alonso the 4 time champion and Vettel the double champion. And the debate about who is better, Vettel or Alonso, wouldn't even get off the ground. Yet we have the arguments mostly because of the title tally.

Another common point of reference is Hamilton as a 'Rookie' beating Alonso (on position count back I might add). We forget that Alonso himself was only 25 at the time. Drivers peak at different times, and I genuinely think Hamilton wouldn't have handled Alonso as his team mate 2010-2013. Alonso was just that good, and still is.

All that said, Hamilton is now driving at that Alonso level, but in a better car and the result is devastating. Unfortunately for Vettel, Hamilton is just a bit better. Vettel has had a comfortable career thus far, with an exceptional car and team at Red Bull for 5 seasons, and a great car, with not such as good team, for the last 2 seasons as well. His team mates in all honesty have been good drivers, but not great drivers. The only young hungry lion he came up against was DR and he struggled. I fear the same for Vettel next season, and the next 12 months could be make or break for his legacy.

It's all about fine margins and those minor things. In 3 years could we be talking about Vettel the 6 time champion who went up against and beat Hamilton? Or will we look back at a 4 time champion, who just fell short of Hamilton's ability and then got trounced by LeClerc....

All we can say is that right now, as of this day, Hamilton is driving better than Vettel.

:thumbup:


Last edited by Zoue on Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 12:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28746
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mikeyg123:

We can simply disagree and that's fine. There's just one thing from your post that I still want to address. You are trying to make a distinction between "better" and "greater". I agree with your thinking (that they are two different things) but I actually think all signs point to Hamilton having Alonso beat in both regards. He was quicker than Alonso in his first year (the one year where you know you will get faster moving forward). Do you honestly think that Alonso would be faster in the same car today? I certainly don't and I see no empirical reason for anyone to. The gaps between Alonso and Button weren't as big as the ones between Hamilton and Button and they all raced each other as drivers with several years experience.

That leaves consistency/avoiding mistakes. Lewis did have a period in 2011 where he made several errors in judgement on track but if you compare them at similar ages and points in their development, neither of them is mistake prone at all. Alonso had a sloppy 2010 but all drivers have periods like that in their career. The errors from Lewis actually came during a point in the 2011 season where the championship was already over with. In looking at their performances while in actual championship battles, Hamilton has been better. He almost never makes a mistake these days and his performance gets stronger as the season progresses. Alonso has been strongest early and has faded late; clinging on to his points lead as his rivals win races to hunt him down.

For me, there is no area where Alonso has Lewis beat anymore. Perhaps strategically Alonso's thinking is more advanced and he's more aware of the various possibilities (going by radio conversations I've heard) but that's about it. And that's not even talking about the biggest difference between them IMO, which is how they mesh with their teams. I see a very clear distinction between Hamilton's positive influence (most of the time) and Alonso's negative influence (far too often). Hamilton becomes a member of the team and he respects and values the other team members. Alonso tries to make it all about himself and has a domineering presence that undermines people.

Just my thoughts.


Hamilton's a positive influence when things go well. Remember when things weren't going that well in 2016? He basically said someone in the team must be sabotaging him. And that's with him being in by far the fastest car and winning most of the races. Can you imagine how he would deal with some of the situations Alonso has been in?

I believe he was referencing all the engines that were failing on him whilst Rosberg had 100% reliability, it seemed more of a throw away remark.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5635
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:


Firstly, I was talking about comparable cars and yes it's just one element but it's a pretty important one. I did say points don't tell the whole story as well which is why I also talked about who I felt performed better and pointed out for example 2010 I felt Lewis got the better of it, irrespective of what the points said. But I also think the other years Alonso did have the edge on performance to go along with the points "win" which is why I mentioned it. If it was just about the points then I wouldn't mention it for some of the reasons given or I'd see it the other way like in 2010.

Secondly whether you like Hughes's piece or not doesn't mean it's not worth mentioning in a discussion involving what the article is specifically about. He states the info comes from the teams and only counts direct comparisons which seems fair enough to me. It's a lot fairer than pointing to poles which include the likes of Silverstone where Alonso was 4ths faster fuel corrected. If it was your turn for the preferential fuel strategy on a McLaren track, you got the pole. If it was your turn on a Ferrari track, you didn't. At least Hughes makes the attempt to keep it fair and use the fuel corrected results in directly comparable situations, for qualifying this means who got the better strategy is irrelevant as it's fuel corrected anyway. For the h2h though yeah the fuel preference makes a difference at the beginning of the season which is one of the reasons I don't think Alonso got the better of Lewis, quite the opposite. The point I'm making is the closeness of it whether we use the direct 2007 comparison or the only other 4 comparable seasons.

Thirdly, I don't know how many times I have to say it within one discussion but I'm not writing off or discounting Lewis's success in a dominant car, not even remotely so, I'm saying comparing his performance in a run in while in a dominant car in a two horse race and comparing it against a run in with the 2/3rd or 3rd/4th best car and increased competition is as lopsided a comparison as you can get with no wonder you get the impression you do from it.

Any form of fuel correction is an estimate and is not accurate and, if you actually pay attention to Hughes' methodology, it's highly questionable in terms of what he includes/excludes. Did you actually watch that season? If so, are you trying to tell me that you feel Alonso got the better of the matchup? I just want to know how absurd we're getting here with all due respect.

That's not even the important part anyway. I marvel at how people perceive drivers as having good or bad seasons without realizing that much of what they are noticing is directly linked to whether or not they have a tough teammate to fight with. The perception that Alonso was particularly great at Ferrari is completely tied to his 100% control over Felipe Massa. The notion that he struggled in 2007 is 100% tied to his battle with Lewis. Likewise most people perceive Hamilton to be at his absolute peak right now but that's also largely tied to the fact that Bottas poses no real threat to him. For the first time since 2009 he's actually able to maximize his strategy and he also has the team 100% behind him rather than the split camps he's been in most of his career with other world champions.

It's not a small thing at all. It's absolutely huge and I marvel at how few people seem to realize it. We've seen the Sergio Perez effect damage multiple careers of his teammates. We've seen Raikkonen go from seeming like the fastest driver in F1 to seeming like a complete slouch relative to the top guys. This is why I cannot put Schumacher on the same footing with Senna personally. His whole career he had #1 status. Michael never had to beat another top driver in the same car at any point in his career. Having a tough teammate is like having a computer virus. At the best of times it's an annoyance but at the worst of times it's outright disastrous.


The only absurd thing is how often I'm having to repeat myself and yes I'm aware of Hughes's methodology as I bothered to read the article before posting it as bizarre as that may sound and he explains it. He explains which ones he's left out and which sessions the data was taken from in the comments section and nothing jumps out as being fishy. You can obviously doubt him, that's your right of course. For the second time no, I don't think Alonso got the better of it in 2007, I do think it was as close as the stats suggest though and yes I was watching.

Having a comfortable team setting is very important I agree but no the perception Alonso's time at Ferrari being great isn't based on having control over Massa, at least not for me. It's based on his own performances during the time versus his main rivals more than any one single thing. I didn't need Button having a good season to tell me Lewis was on it in 2012 either. Drivers can have poorer seasons with a comfortable setting (2008) just as often as having a good one without (2012) in my experience. Other influences like the car's competitiveness and your rivals car competitiveness, where you are in the title picture and who you are fighting with are as big of influences on how a driver performs as his setting in the team imo but I do think it's important and the best way to approach this game for as long as it isn't a spec series, yeah.

You are debunking your own positions here somewhat. You claim Hamilton's 2008 season was worse than his 2012 season despite having a non-competitive teammate in 2008 vs having Button in 2012. I agree that Hamilton's performance was near flawless in 2012 and that 2008 was perhaps his second most mistake-prone season. I also think his car in 2008 was second best while the 2012 car was match for the Red Bull on pace. None the less, he won the championship in 2008 and did not win it in 2012. Now, before you say it; not winning in 2012 was not much about Button at all and it was a lot more about the team itself but the fact is that he managed to win a WDC in a scruffy season largely because the whole team was focused on getting him there.

The thing is that I actually do think having the team behind you and in sync with you brings out the best in your performance. I do think Hamilton is performing at his very best at the moment and that Alonso was at his best in those situations too. Having internal turmoil and camps forming, distrust and paranoia is not good for any driver. Having that 100% support and not having to watch your back regarding your teammate frees you to fully focus on beating everyone else without tripping on internal politics and while employing whatever strategy you want to. When you ignore things like getting preference on pitstop strategy instead of having to wait your turn or being able to keep your teammate out on track to slow down the other guys or force them to cover him or simply being able to move your teammate out of your way when he's ahead of you on track instead of having to fight him; you are ignoring a MASSIVE advantage.

In other words, the situations that Hamilton and Alonso found themselves in following their split as teammates were night and day different. They were not comparable at all. Alonso was on a team that was 100% committed to maximizing his chances in every race; even at the expense of his teammate. Hamilton was on a team that was committed to providing an equal opportunity for both former WDC drivers; even at the expense of maximizing Lewis's results. When you claimed that they had the same chance at beating Vettel, you completely missed the mark.


I'm really not, the point being made was about performance levels of the drivers in each of those years and how they corresponded to their team environment, not about their success achieved during those particular years. Success can be affected by too many outliers in a non-spec series like the things you mention that got in the way in 2012, namely team errors and a better driver in the better car he's chasing than in 2008, two things entirely out of his control and equally important as having the sole focus of the team. His out and out performance however was greater in 2012 and I don't think that's in doubt.


I still agree it's important yeah, I just don't think it's crucial to achieving your best performance. While I'd agree that Lewis is driving better now than in say 2014 when he was in a more tense environment, I don't think it's only to do with the atmosphere within the team and strategy preference etc.. The calibre of the driver he's up against swapping around (Seb and Nico) could've brought this level out of him. Having a fight with a different team when you don't know what each others car performance is going to be for sure could've brought it out of him. Being a 4x Champ instead of a 1x could've helped him reach a better place mentally in his approach now he's not chasing Seb's numbers and his numbers are so good. Age as touched on before could play a role. There's many things that impact a drivers performance I think.


Every bit as good a chance is an exaggeration tbf yeah but I did go on to say the points didn't tell the whole story and it was the cars I found comparable. Lewis obviously had the tougher internal battle but he also invariably had the quicker car over the same period which is still important for obvious reasons, it's not like it went south all the time and those times it didn't he had an advantage in pace. You're never going to get a perfect comparison even in the same team with reliability and things like that outside their control so comparable has to have some wiggle room. I think we'd both class last years title fight as comparable cars but I'm sure there are Ferrari fans who'd strongly disagree with me on that one too for reasons x,y and z.

In what way is Lewis driving better now than in 2014? In what way is Vettel any better than Rosberg? For me, in closely matched machinery, Rosebrg has twice put up a better fight than Vettel these last two years. I'd also say that Lewis never really put a wheel wrong in 2014. This is basically what I'm talking about. Perception is a funny thing.

Let me make a few points about the whole Alonso thing. So much of the propping up of Alonso ignores the unpredictability of racing. For example, let's replace Alonso with Hamilton at McLaren these last couple of years. Do you foresee any change to the nature of how he would match up to his teammate? I sure as hell don't. The car would still be terrible and Vandoorne would still be miles off his teammate.

But let's also replace Hamilton with Alonso during the years where he and Rosberg were fighting for championships. Can you say with confidence that Alonso would come out on top every time? Are you confident that he could out-qualify Rosberg? Are you confident that he could beat Nico in the points even though, most of the time, Rosberg would be able to take second place no matter how much better Alonso performed on the day? Are you confident that he wouldn't have substantially worse luck with reliability or other factors outside of his control? The fact is that you (and I) have absolutely no idea how that matchup would go in those circumstances. None whatsoever. To hear the "Alonso would do _____" crowd, you'd think that F1 races were conducted in a sterile laboratory. Sometimes fluke occurrences have an impact. Sometimes the better driver loses. So the whole "he would do this" or "he would do that" argument holds very little weight because you simply don't actually know. The fact is that Alonso has in the past struggled with teammates who are strong qualifiers and it has created friction within his teams in 2004 and 2007. Alonso has also not always come through with his title chances so to claim he would easily have won the titles Lewis did is just a bunch of chit chat. The only thing that matters is what you do, not what people think you could do.

Was Alonso impressive in the 2011-2013 window? Yes he was. If we're only looking at those three years, I'd say he would have to be considered F1's top performer during that window of time. The problem is that there have been many seasons both before and after that and the Alonso fans seem to want to suggest that those three years are the only ones that actually matter. As great as Alonso was during that window, for me, Hamilton has been better these last several years (at about the same age as Alonso was then - not coincidentally).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28746
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Not going to address it all as it's been talked about but just on some of the comparisons on being better in championship run ins, how can you compare Alonso in the 3rd-4th fastest car in the run in for 2012 vs Lewis in the utterly dominant Mercedes starting no further back than 2nd in 2016? Or the 2010 Ferrari with the equally quick McLaren with 2 WDC's in them and a Red Bull 4ths quicker compared to again only fighting Rosberg in one of the most dominant cars in history in 2014?

Palmer would look better at handling a run in with both of those Lewis's situation than Alonso could in those same roles. One has to race multiple World Champions (2 in 2010 and 4 in 2012) and 2 midfielders in equal or quicker cars to reach the podium and the other has to just not crash. Literally.

Of course it's going to look better. Alonso's never had a car anything remotely like that to lean on in a championship run in and I think while you mention the pressures of fighting at the front you don't mention the release of pressure that comes with knowing you have such a car to lean on in the run in. 2006 the Ferrari was quicker in the second half and it was Schumacher he was racing. 2010 the Red Bull was quicker in all but a couple in the run in. 2007 is the only one he blew really as it was the most consistently quick car he had. 2012 he scored 7 podiums in 9 races (DNF'd the other two) in the run in while in at best the 3rd quickest car. You seem to forget Lewis had every bit as good a chance of beating Vettel during the Red Bull run as Alonso did so why not include those run ins instead of his 2 horse race turbo monsters of 2014+2016?

That's where the imbalance comes from, you're holding Alonso to a much higher standard so of course he's not going to impress you as much. If Ferrari find a trick and Seb finds the 4th advantage he had in 2010 and runs out every remaining race this year and wins the title then it's not going to make Lewis's run in look bad to anyone with any rational thought. I think most understand the role the cars play in F1.

The problem we have with the Lewis-Alonso comparison is they've only been in comparable cars 5 times and in 4 of them Alonso finished ahead and lost the other one in the same team on second place count back. And they've been on opposite sides of the grid since so impossible to compare. Points don't tell the whole story of course , I had it 3-2 personally because Lewis looked better in 2007+10 and Alonso in 2011,12 and 13. But the point is they've always been close while in comparable cars so why assume it's any different just because they got cars on opposite sides of the grid for the past few years?

That's just as big an assumption as anyone assuming Alonso would be doing what Lewis is doing.

The parts I bolded are absolute nonsense Lotus. Alonso had a team built around him and a #2 driver that he could simply get on the radio and have moved out of his way and whose strategy the team could compromise in order to help Alonso. Hamilton had to actually race his teammate (a WDC himself) and they took points off of each other frequently. Both were totally compromised by the fact that the team had to trip over itself to be "equal". Lewis also had to deal with a team that made more errors than any other team up front and had vastly more reliability issues than Alonso. To claim they were in similar situations is completely inaccurate. The 2010 Ferrari was faster than the Mclaren at 14 of the 19 races. That's even for you? The Ferrari was easily the second best car that year overall. In 2011 and 2012 the McLaren was quicker but far less reliable and with a comedy of errors from the team. If you even out reliability in 2012, Hamilton takes the WDC.

Vettel had the best car during the time you're talking about and Alonso had the #1 status and a pretty sharp team strategically but was often in a car that was off the pace. Hamilton and Button just stepped on each other's toes the whole time and had a joke of a team but pretty good performance from the cars. The fact is that they were not in similar situations at all in those years. Now 2007 was a very similar situation...

In 2005 and 2006 Alonso did the vast majority of his damage early and watched Raikkonen and Schumacher dominate the second half of the season. In 2010 Alonso looked like he had the title in the bag before Vettel won 4 of the last 5 titles. You want to claim that Hamilton's performance at the end of those close seasons against Rosberg should be written off yet Rosebrg is a stronger driver than Raikkonen (the guy Alonso had to hold off for his first title in 2005) and he dominated Schumacher in the same car just a few years after Alonso held him off for his 2006 title. You also ignore this year and last year; where Hamilton has turned it up a notch in the second half of the season in a title race. I won't ignore how they handle pressure and perform when fighting for championships.


It's not nonsense, it happened. And I did say comparable cars rather than comparable situations but even if we ignore those 4 seasons and only look at 2007 the picture doesn't change any, it's still ridiculously close with Hughes having Alonso a smidge faster fuel corrected and ahead in the head 2 head as well, equal on points and only beaten on countback. As for a car being roughly equal despite being slower in 14 out of 19 well it can't be that surprising to you as you feel a car that got outqualified 15-5 was actually quicker last year, never mind roughly equal. And I don't think those figures are accurate anyway, it was more like 10-9 or 11-8 going by qualifying (To Ferrari).

You miss out they dominated in the second half or overturned a deficit in the second half with quicker cars which is quite important. That Alonso's cars were more competitive in the first half of 2005/6 is all we need to know. The removal of the J Damper and Ferrari improving is why he was less competitive in the second half rather than any wobbles in the run in for 06. That you were comparing them to Lewis's efforts in a dominant car during a run in against one guy was the issue in the first place, it's completely lop sided in Lewis's favour so of course it'll look better. And I don't want them written off, I just think it's a poor comparison to anything other than another dominant car comparison point.

The last two years I left out because they aren't dominant cars and so the comparison to the likes of 2005 and 2006 are fine as they're at least similar enough conditions with it being between two teams who alternated who had the best car any given race so it works. 2007 works too for the same reason. 2010 and 2012 don't for blindingly obvious reasons.

Let's be clear about a few things. First of all, the pace of the car is just one element. If Heikki Kovaleinen had stayed at McLaren, you'd have a point in comparing Hamilton and Alonso's points totals during this window of 3-4 years that you seem to think are the only period of time that matters but the fact is that he didn't. As such, Hamilton's situation was not at all comparable on the level of looking at points. This is not something to sweep under the rug. If, for example, Roseberg were to have remained at Mercedes these last two years, Hamilton's chances of winning these titles would have decreased dramatically due to the simple fact that, when the Mercedes car was strongest, Hamilton wouldn't always be the one to truly capitalize. It's simple mathematics. That's why Vettel was so upset after qualifying at Monza and it's why Alonso had a meltdown in 2007. Having #1 status is every bit as important as having a quick car. Losing points to your teammate (unless you have the dominant car) means losing the championship.

Secondly I already discussed your attempts to try to pass off this news article as some sort of authoritative assessment. What Hughes fails to mention is that, from the time they began alternating fuel strategy, Hamilton out-qualified Alonso 8-4 and had 6 pole positions to Alonso's 1. Hamilton also firmly took control of the matchup for the vast majority of the season; with the points becoming artificially close after the disastrous last 2 races. Trying to pass off 2007 as a year where Alonso got the better of Hamilton is a joke frankly speaking.

Third, you wanting to discount Hamilton's success when in a dominant car is also not very sensible. Do we discount Senna's success in 1988? The pace gap between him and Prost was actually MUCH bigger than the gap between Hamilton and Rosebrg and the gap from McLaren to the next team was just as big. This is a common theme with the Alonso crowd; seeking to discredit the championships that others have won while talking up the non-championships for Alonso and blaming the car...



Firstly, I was talking about comparable cars and yes it's just one element but it's a pretty important one. I did say points don't tell the whole story as well which is why I also talked about who I felt performed better and pointed out for example 2010 I felt Lewis got the better of it, irrespective of what the points said. But I also think the other years Alonso did have the edge on performance to go along with the points "win" which is why I mentioned it. If it was just about the points then I wouldn't mention it for some of the reasons given or I'd see it the other way like in 2010.

Secondly whether you like Hughes's piece or not doesn't mean it's not worth mentioning in a discussion involving what the article is specifically about. He states the info comes from the teams and only counts direct comparisons which seems fair enough to me. It's a lot fairer than pointing to poles which include the likes of Silverstone where Alonso was 4ths faster fuel corrected. If it was your turn for the preferential fuel strategy on a McLaren track, you got the pole. If it was your turn on a Ferrari track, you didn't. At least Hughes makes the attempt to keep it fair and use the fuel corrected results in directly comparable situations, for qualifying this means who got the better strategy is irrelevant as it's fuel corrected anyway. For the h2h though yeah the fuel preference makes a difference at the beginning of the season which is one of the reasons I don't think Alonso got the better of Lewis, quite the opposite. The point I'm making is the closeness of it whether we use the direct 2007 comparison or the only other 4 comparable seasons.

Thirdly, I don't know how many times I have to say it within one discussion but I'm not writing off or discounting Lewis's success in a dominant car, not even remotely so, I'm saying comparing his performance in a run in while in a dominant car in a two horse race and comparing it against a run in with the 2/3rd or 3rd/4th best car and increased competition is as lopsided a comparison as you can get with no wonder you get the impression you do from it.

I don't understand the notion that the 2007 season is seen as Hamilton's pinnacle, a driver new to F1 and learning the ropes, it's quite clear that he improved throughout the season, at the beginning of the season he was out qualified by Alonso 4-1 fuel corrected, after that he was out qualifying Alonso more often than not.

In respect to Silverstone Hamilton had to miss the testing there just prior to the race due to McLaren sponsorship commitments, crazy to think that could happen, anyway Alonso found a set up that he was able to keep secret from Hamilton because of that point he was able to stop Hamilton from copying his set up.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28746
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:


Firstly, I was talking about comparable cars and yes it's just one element but it's a pretty important one. I did say points don't tell the whole story as well which is why I also talked about who I felt performed better and pointed out for example 2010 I felt Lewis got the better of it, irrespective of what the points said. But I also think the other years Alonso did have the edge on performance to go along with the points "win" which is why I mentioned it. If it was just about the points then I wouldn't mention it for some of the reasons given or I'd see it the other way like in 2010.

Secondly whether you like Hughes's piece or not doesn't mean it's not worth mentioning in a discussion involving what the article is specifically about. He states the info comes from the teams and only counts direct comparisons which seems fair enough to me. It's a lot fairer than pointing to poles which include the likes of Silverstone where Alonso was 4ths faster fuel corrected. If it was your turn for the preferential fuel strategy on a McLaren track, you got the pole. If it was your turn on a Ferrari track, you didn't. At least Hughes makes the attempt to keep it fair and use the fuel corrected results in directly comparable situations, for qualifying this means who got the better strategy is irrelevant as it's fuel corrected anyway. For the h2h though yeah the fuel preference makes a difference at the beginning of the season which is one of the reasons I don't think Alonso got the better of Lewis, quite the opposite. The point I'm making is the closeness of it whether we use the direct 2007 comparison or the only other 4 comparable seasons.

Thirdly, I don't know how many times I have to say it within one discussion but I'm not writing off or discounting Lewis's success in a dominant car, not even remotely so, I'm saying comparing his performance in a run in while in a dominant car in a two horse race and comparing it against a run in with the 2/3rd or 3rd/4th best car and increased competition is as lopsided a comparison as you can get with no wonder you get the impression you do from it.

Any form of fuel correction is an estimate and is not accurate and, if you actually pay attention to Hughes' methodology, it's highly questionable in terms of what he includes/excludes. Did you actually watch that season? If so, are you trying to tell me that you feel Alonso got the better of the matchup? I just want to know how absurd we're getting here with all due respect.

That's not even the important part anyway. I marvel at how people perceive drivers as having good or bad seasons without realizing that much of what they are noticing is directly linked to whether or not they have a tough teammate to fight with. The perception that Alonso was particularly great at Ferrari is completely tied to his 100% control over Felipe Massa. The notion that he struggled in 2007 is 100% tied to his battle with Lewis. Likewise most people perceive Hamilton to be at his absolute peak right now but that's also largely tied to the fact that Bottas poses no real threat to him. For the first time since 2009 he's actually able to maximize his strategy and he also has the team 100% behind him rather than the split camps he's been in most of his career with other world champions.

It's not a small thing at all. It's absolutely huge and I marvel at how few people seem to realize it. We've seen the Sergio Perez effect damage multiple careers of his teammates. We've seen Raikkonen go from seeming like the fastest driver in F1 to seeming like a complete slouch relative to the top guys. This is why I cannot put Schumacher on the same footing with Senna personally. His whole career he had #1 status. Michael never had to beat another top driver in the same car at any point in his career. Having a tough teammate is like having a computer virus. At the best of times it's an annoyance but at the worst of times it's outright disastrous.


The only absurd thing is how often I'm having to repeat myself and yes I'm aware of Hughes's methodology as I bothered to read the article before posting it as bizarre as that may sound and he explains it. He explains which ones he's left out and which sessions the data was taken from in the comments section and nothing jumps out as being fishy. You can obviously doubt him, that's your right of course. For the second time no, I don't think Alonso got the better of it in 2007, I do think it was as close as the stats suggest though and yes I was watching.

Having a comfortable team setting is very important I agree but no the perception Alonso's time at Ferrari being great isn't based on having control over Massa, at least not for me. It's based on his own performances during the time versus his main rivals more than any one single thing. I didn't need Button having a good season to tell me Lewis was on it in 2012 either. Drivers can have poorer seasons with a comfortable setting (2008) just as often as having a good one without (2012) in my experience. Other influences like the car's competitiveness and your rivals car competitiveness, where you are in the title picture and who you are fighting with are as big of influences on how a driver performs as his setting in the team imo but I do think it's important and the best way to approach this game for as long as it isn't a spec series, yeah.

You know if we are going to use Hughes methodology as fact why do I never see Button used as a cross reference were Hamilton beats Alonso hands down?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28746
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:


Firstly, I was talking about comparable cars and yes it's just one element but it's a pretty important one. I did say points don't tell the whole story as well which is why I also talked about who I felt performed better and pointed out for example 2010 I felt Lewis got the better of it, irrespective of what the points said. But I also think the other years Alonso did have the edge on performance to go along with the points "win" which is why I mentioned it. If it was just about the points then I wouldn't mention it for some of the reasons given or I'd see it the other way like in 2010.

Secondly whether you like Hughes's piece or not doesn't mean it's not worth mentioning in a discussion involving what the article is specifically about. He states the info comes from the teams and only counts direct comparisons which seems fair enough to me. It's a lot fairer than pointing to poles which include the likes of Silverstone where Alonso was 4ths faster fuel corrected. If it was your turn for the preferential fuel strategy on a McLaren track, you got the pole. If it was your turn on a Ferrari track, you didn't. At least Hughes makes the attempt to keep it fair and use the fuel corrected results in directly comparable situations, for qualifying this means who got the better strategy is irrelevant as it's fuel corrected anyway. For the h2h though yeah the fuel preference makes a difference at the beginning of the season which is one of the reasons I don't think Alonso got the better of Lewis, quite the opposite. The point I'm making is the closeness of it whether we use the direct 2007 comparison or the only other 4 comparable seasons.

Thirdly, I don't know how many times I have to say it within one discussion but I'm not writing off or discounting Lewis's success in a dominant car, not even remotely so, I'm saying comparing his performance in a run in while in a dominant car in a two horse race and comparing it against a run in with the 2/3rd or 3rd/4th best car and increased competition is as lopsided a comparison as you can get with no wonder you get the impression you do from it.

Any form of fuel correction is an estimate and is not accurate and, if you actually pay attention to Hughes' methodology, it's highly questionable in terms of what he includes/excludes. Did you actually watch that season? If so, are you trying to tell me that you feel Alonso got the better of the matchup? I just want to know how absurd we're getting here with all due respect.

That's not even the important part anyway. I marvel at how people perceive drivers as having good or bad seasons without realizing that much of what they are noticing is directly linked to whether or not they have a tough teammate to fight with. The perception that Alonso was particularly great at Ferrari is completely tied to his 100% control over Felipe Massa. The notion that he struggled in 2007 is 100% tied to his battle with Lewis. Likewise most people perceive Hamilton to be at his absolute peak right now but that's also largely tied to the fact that Bottas poses no real threat to him. For the first time since 2009 he's actually able to maximize his strategy and he also has the team 100% behind him rather than the split camps he's been in most of his career with other world champions.

It's not a small thing at all. It's absolutely huge and I marvel at how few people seem to realize it. We've seen the Sergio Perez effect damage multiple careers of his teammates. We've seen Raikkonen go from seeming like the fastest driver in F1 to seeming like a complete slouch relative to the top guys. This is why I cannot put Schumacher on the same footing with Senna personally. His whole career he had #1 status. Michael never had to beat another top driver in the same car at any point in his career. Having a tough teammate is like having a computer virus. At the best of times it's an annoyance but at the worst of times it's outright disastrous.


The only absurd thing is how often I'm having to repeat myself and yes I'm aware of Hughes's methodology as I bothered to read the article before posting it as bizarre as that may sound and he explains it. He explains which ones he's left out and which sessions the data was taken from in the comments section and nothing jumps out as being fishy. You can obviously doubt him, that's your right of course. For the second time no, I don't think Alonso got the better of it in 2007, I do think it was as close as the stats suggest though and yes I was watching.

Having a comfortable team setting is very important I agree but no the perception Alonso's time at Ferrari being great isn't based on having control over Massa, at least not for me. It's based on his own performances during the time versus his main rivals more than any one single thing. I didn't need Button having a good season to tell me Lewis was on it in 2012 either. Drivers can have poorer seasons with a comfortable setting (2008) just as often as having a good one without (2012) in my experience. Other influences like the car's competitiveness and your rivals car competitiveness, where you are in the title picture and who you are fighting with are as big of influences on how a driver performs as his setting in the team imo but I do think it's important and the best way to approach this game for as long as it isn't a spec series, yeah.

You are debunking your own positions here somewhat. You claim Hamilton's 2008 season was worse than his 2012 season despite having a non-competitive teammate in 2008 vs having Button in 2012. I agree that Hamilton's performance was near flawless in 2012 and that 2008 was perhaps his second most mistake-prone season. I also think his car in 2008 was second best while the 2012 car was match for the Red Bull on pace. None the less, he won the championship in 2008 and did not win it in 2012. Now, before you say it; not winning in 2012 was not much about Button at all and it was a lot more about the team itself but the fact is that he managed to win a WDC in a scruffy season largely because the whole team was focused on getting him there.

The thing is that I actually do think having the team behind you and in sync with you brings out the best in your performance. I do think Hamilton is performing at his very best at the moment and that Alonso was at his best in those situations too. Having internal turmoil and camps forming, distrust and paranoia is not good for any driver. Having that 100% support and not having to watch your back regarding your teammate frees you to fully focus on beating everyone else without tripping on internal politics and while employing whatever strategy you want to. When you ignore things like getting preference on pitstop strategy instead of having to wait your turn or being able to keep your teammate out on track to slow down the other guys or force them to cover him or simply being able to move your teammate out of your way when he's ahead of you on track instead of having to fight him; you are ignoring a MASSIVE advantage.

In other words, the situations that Hamilton and Alonso found themselves in following their split as teammates were night and day different. They were not comparable at all. Alonso was on a team that was 100% committed to maximizing his chances in every race; even at the expense of his teammate. Hamilton was on a team that was committed to providing an equal opportunity for both former WDC drivers; even at the expense of maximizing Lewis's results. When you claimed that they had the same chance at beating Vettel, you completely missed the mark.

An example of this was at Silverstone 2012, Hamilton was fighting for the title whilst Button was still mired with performance problems, Hamilton pitted and came out back on track behind Button who had yet to pit, McLaren (Whitmarsh) would not give the order to Button to let Hamilton past so Button did his level best to keep Hamilton behind to the effect that Grosjean managed to catch the both of them and got by Hamilton.

This being one of the reasons I guess why Hamilton left McLaren, this showed a basic lack of support for Hamilton while in contrast Alonso got 100% support from Ferrari, could you ever imagine Button having a gearbox seal removed so he could be penalised damaging his race to the benefit of Hamilton?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 8:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5024
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

The only absurd thing is how often I'm having to repeat myself and yes I'm aware of Hughes's methodology as I bothered to read the article before posting it as bizarre as that may sound and he explains it. He explains which ones he's left out and which sessions the data was taken from in the comments section and nothing jumps out as being fishy. You can obviously doubt him, that's your right of course. For the second time no, I don't think Alonso got the better of it in 2007, I do think it was as close as the stats suggest though and yes I was watching.

Having a comfortable team setting is very important I agree but no the perception Alonso's time at Ferrari being great isn't based on having control over Massa, at least not for me. It's based on his own performances during the time versus his main rivals more than any one single thing. I didn't need Button having a good season to tell me Lewis was on it in 2012 either. Drivers can have poorer seasons with a comfortable setting (2008) just as often as having a good one without (2012) in my experience. Other influences like the car's competitiveness and your rivals car competitiveness, where you are in the title picture and who you are fighting with are as big of influences on how a driver performs as his setting in the team imo but I do think it's important and the best way to approach this game for as long as it isn't a spec series, yeah.

You are debunking your own positions here somewhat. You claim Hamilton's 2008 season was worse than his 2012 season despite having a non-competitive teammate in 2008 vs having Button in 2012. I agree that Hamilton's performance was near flawless in 2012 and that 2008 was perhaps his second most mistake-prone season. I also think his car in 2008 was second best while the 2012 car was match for the Red Bull on pace. None the less, he won the championship in 2008 and did not win it in 2012. Now, before you say it; not winning in 2012 was not much about Button at all and it was a lot more about the team itself but the fact is that he managed to win a WDC in a scruffy season largely because the whole team was focused on getting him there.

The thing is that I actually do think having the team behind you and in sync with you brings out the best in your performance. I do think Hamilton is performing at his very best at the moment and that Alonso was at his best in those situations too. Having internal turmoil and camps forming, distrust and paranoia is not good for any driver. Having that 100% support and not having to watch your back regarding your teammate frees you to fully focus on beating everyone else without tripping on internal politics and while employing whatever strategy you want to. When you ignore things like getting preference on pitstop strategy instead of having to wait your turn or being able to keep your teammate out on track to slow down the other guys or force them to cover him or simply being able to move your teammate out of your way when he's ahead of you on track instead of having to fight him; you are ignoring a MASSIVE advantage.

In other words, the situations that Hamilton and Alonso found themselves in following their split as teammates were night and day different. They were not comparable at all. Alonso was on a team that was 100% committed to maximizing his chances in every race; even at the expense of his teammate. Hamilton was on a team that was committed to providing an equal opportunity for both former WDC drivers; even at the expense of maximizing Lewis's results. When you claimed that they had the same chance at beating Vettel, you completely missed the mark.


I'm really not, the point being made was about performance levels of the drivers in each of those years and how they corresponded to their team environment, not about their success achieved during those particular years. Success can be affected by too many outliers in a non-spec series like the things you mention that got in the way in 2012, namely team errors and a better driver in the better car he's chasing than in 2008, two things entirely out of his control and equally important as having the sole focus of the team. His out and out performance however was greater in 2012 and I don't think that's in doubt.


I still agree it's important yeah, I just don't think it's crucial to achieving your best performance. While I'd agree that Lewis is driving better now than in say 2014 when he was in a more tense environment, I don't think it's only to do with the atmosphere within the team and strategy preference etc.. The calibre of the driver he's up against swapping around (Seb and Nico) could've brought this level out of him. Having a fight with a different team when you don't know what each others car performance is going to be for sure could've brought it out of him. Being a 4x Champ instead of a 1x could've helped him reach a better place mentally in his approach now he's not chasing Seb's numbers and his numbers are so good. Age as touched on before could play a role. There's many things that impact a drivers performance I think.


Every bit as good a chance is an exaggeration tbf yeah but I did go on to say the points didn't tell the whole story and it was the cars I found comparable. Lewis obviously had the tougher internal battle but he also invariably had the quicker car over the same period which is still important for obvious reasons, it's not like it went south all the time and those times it didn't he had an advantage in pace. You're never going to get a perfect comparison even in the same team with reliability and things like that outside their control so comparable has to have some wiggle room. I think we'd both class last years title fight as comparable cars but I'm sure there are Ferrari fans who'd strongly disagree with me on that one too for reasons x,y and z.

In what way is Lewis driving better now than in 2014? In what way is Vettel any better than Rosberg? For me, in closely matched machinery, Rosebrg has twice put up a better fight than Vettel these last two years. I'd also say that Lewis never really put a wheel wrong in 2014. This is basically what I'm talking about. Perception is a funny thing.

Let me make a few points about the whole Alonso thing. So much of the propping up of Alonso ignores the unpredictability of racing. For example, let's replace Alonso with Hamilton at McLaren these last couple of years. Do you foresee any change to the nature of how he would match up to his teammate? I sure as hell don't. The car would still be terrible and Vandoorne would still be miles off his teammate.

But let's also replace Hamilton with Alonso during the years where he and Rosberg were fighting for championships. Can you say with confidence that Alonso would come out on top every time? Are you confident that he could out-qualify Rosberg? Are you confident that he could beat Nico in the points even though, most of the time, Rosberg would be able to take second place no matter how much better Alonso performed on the day? Are you confident that he wouldn't have substantially worse luck with reliability or other factors outside of his control? The fact is that you (and I) have absolutely no idea how that matchup would go in those circumstances. None whatsoever. To hear the "Alonso would do _____" crowd, you'd think that F1 races were conducted in a sterile laboratory. Sometimes fluke occurrences have an impact. Sometimes the better driver loses. So the whole "he would do this" or "he would do that" argument holds very little weight because you simply don't actually know. The fact is that Alonso has in the past struggled with teammates who are strong qualifiers and it has created friction within his teams in 2004 and 2007. Alonso has also not always come through with his title chances so to claim he would easily have won the titles Lewis did is just a bunch of chit chat. The only thing that matters is what you do, not what people think you could do.

Was Alonso impressive in the 2011-2013 window? Yes he was. If we're only looking at those three years, I'd say he would have to be considered F1's top performer during that window of time. The problem is that there have been many seasons both before and after that and the Alonso fans seem to want to suggest that those three years are the only ones that actually matter. As great as Alonso was during that window, for me, Hamilton has been better these last several years (at about the same age as Alonso was then - not coincidentally).


In the way he isn't making the small mistakes in qualifying and getting out qualified, isn't spinning or making errors during any races and just looks all round at the top of his game. I think generally Seb is quicker and more consistent than Nico, especially in the wet. He's also stronger wheel to wheel though not a big strength of either. Perception is funny yes like how Nico is now held up as some sort of top tier driver instead of the guy even in his championship year that got beat by a McHonda one race, got outscored over a sizeable part of the season by Ricciardo, showed all the race craft of a drunk blind guy with Lewis wheel to wheel on multiple occasions and needed Lewis getting too blasè about finding a workaround on the clutch issue to actually win the title.


I think part of the issue here is your own refusal to accept your own biases, we all have them. You can readily sum up in a line how Lewis would do what Alonso is doing in the McLaren"s no question but the thought of Alonso beating Nico Rosberg in a two horse race is somehow now a monumental task you're just not sure about. You were half right, we do have absolutely no idea how it would go for sure but that goes for Lewis's situation if he was in Alonso's shoes too. Just because it's easy for you to say it so concretely one way but not the other doesn't mean that's how others see it who are trying to look through both eyes. And lets not pretend Lewis hadn't had friction with his teams, he's had more than Alonso (Alo,But and Nico) so I've no idea what that's supposed to mean, neither of them are the poster child for harmony within teams when they feel slighted. You're just again excusing one and not the other.

Agree about that time period but I don't think anyone's holding them up as the only ones that matter, 2007 matters as does every other year if we're talking in a wider who's better discussion of course but when it comes to direct comparisons we have such few between them because of their cars so the times they did have anything near similar paced cars is going to be looked at and those happened to include those years. They should be discussed with full context on both sides though obviously.

_________________
"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: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5024
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
The parts I bolded are absolute nonsense Lotus. Alonso had a team built around him and a #2 driver that he could simply get on the radio and have moved out of his way and whose strategy the team could compromise in order to help Alonso. Hamilton had to actually race his teammate (a WDC himself) and they took points off of each other frequently. Both were totally compromised by the fact that the team had to trip over itself to be "equal". Lewis also had to deal with a team that made more errors than any other team up front and had vastly more reliability issues than Alonso. To claim they were in similar situations is completely inaccurate. The 2010 Ferrari was faster than the Mclaren at 14 of the 19 races. That's even for you? The Ferrari was easily the second best car that year overall. In 2011 and 2012 the McLaren was quicker but far less reliable and with a comedy of errors from the team. If you even out reliability in 2012, Hamilton takes the WDC.

Vettel had the best car during the time you're talking about and Alonso had the #1 status and a pretty sharp team strategically but was often in a car that was off the pace. Hamilton and Button just stepped on each other's toes the whole time and had a joke of a team but pretty good performance from the cars. The fact is that they were not in similar situations at all in those years. Now 2007 was a very similar situation...

In 2005 and 2006 Alonso did the vast majority of his damage early and watched Raikkonen and Schumacher dominate the second half of the season. In 2010 Alonso looked like he had the title in the bag before Vettel won 4 of the last 5 titles. You want to claim that Hamilton's performance at the end of those close seasons against Rosberg should be written off yet Rosebrg is a stronger driver than Raikkonen (the guy Alonso had to hold off for his first title in 2005) and he dominated Schumacher in the same car just a few years after Alonso held him off for his 2006 title. You also ignore this year and last year; where Hamilton has turned it up a notch in the second half of the season in a title race. I won't ignore how they handle pressure and perform when fighting for championships.


It's not nonsense, it happened. And I did say comparable cars rather than comparable situations but even if we ignore those 4 seasons and only look at 2007 the picture doesn't change any, it's still ridiculously close with Hughes having Alonso a smidge faster fuel corrected and ahead in the head 2 head as well, equal on points and only beaten on countback. As for a car being roughly equal despite being slower in 14 out of 19 well it can't be that surprising to you as you feel a car that got outqualified 15-5 was actually quicker last year, never mind roughly equal. And I don't think those figures are accurate anyway, it was more like 10-9 or 11-8 going by qualifying (To Ferrari).

You miss out they dominated in the second half or overturned a deficit in the second half with quicker cars which is quite important. That Alonso's cars were more competitive in the first half of 2005/6 is all we need to know. The removal of the J Damper and Ferrari improving is why he was less competitive in the second half rather than any wobbles in the run in for 06. That you were comparing them to Lewis's efforts in a dominant car during a run in against one guy was the issue in the first place, it's completely lop sided in Lewis's favour so of course it'll look better. And I don't want them written off, I just think it's a poor comparison to anything other than another dominant car comparison point.

The last two years I left out because they aren't dominant cars and so the comparison to the likes of 2005 and 2006 are fine as they're at least similar enough conditions with it being between two teams who alternated who had the best car any given race so it works. 2007 works too for the same reason. 2010 and 2012 don't for blindingly obvious reasons.

Let's be clear about a few things. First of all, the pace of the car is just one element. If Heikki Kovaleinen had stayed at McLaren, you'd have a point in comparing Hamilton and Alonso's points totals during this window of 3-4 years that you seem to think are the only period of time that matters but the fact is that he didn't. As such, Hamilton's situation was not at all comparable on the level of looking at points. This is not something to sweep under the rug. If, for example, Roseberg were to have remained at Mercedes these last two years, Hamilton's chances of winning these titles would have decreased dramatically due to the simple fact that, when the Mercedes car was strongest, Hamilton wouldn't always be the one to truly capitalize. It's simple mathematics. That's why Vettel was so upset after qualifying at Monza and it's why Alonso had a meltdown in 2007. Having #1 status is every bit as important as having a quick car. Losing points to your teammate (unless you have the dominant car) means losing the championship.

Secondly I already discussed your attempts to try to pass off this news article as some sort of authoritative assessment. What Hughes fails to mention is that, from the time they began alternating fuel strategy, Hamilton out-qualified Alonso 8-4 and had 6 pole positions to Alonso's 1. Hamilton also firmly took control of the matchup for the vast majority of the season; with the points becoming artificially close after the disastrous last 2 races. Trying to pass off 2007 as a year where Alonso got the better of Hamilton is a joke frankly speaking.

Third, you wanting to discount Hamilton's success when in a dominant car is also not very sensible. Do we discount Senna's success in 1988? The pace gap between him and Prost was actually MUCH bigger than the gap between Hamilton and Rosebrg and the gap from McLaren to the next team was just as big. This is a common theme with the Alonso crowd; seeking to discredit the championships that others have won while talking up the non-championships for Alonso and blaming the car...



Firstly, I was talking about comparable cars and yes it's just one element but it's a pretty important one. I did say points don't tell the whole story as well which is why I also talked about who I felt performed better and pointed out for example 2010 I felt Lewis got the better of it, irrespective of what the points said. But I also think the other years Alonso did have the edge on performance to go along with the points "win" which is why I mentioned it. If it was just about the points then I wouldn't mention it for some of the reasons given or I'd see it the other way like in 2010.

Secondly whether you like Hughes's piece or not doesn't mean it's not worth mentioning in a discussion involving what the article is specifically about. He states the info comes from the teams and only counts direct comparisons which seems fair enough to me. It's a lot fairer than pointing to poles which include the likes of Silverstone where Alonso was 4ths faster fuel corrected. If it was your turn for the preferential fuel strategy on a McLaren track, you got the pole. If it was your turn on a Ferrari track, you didn't. At least Hughes makes the attempt to keep it fair and use the fuel corrected results in directly comparable situations, for qualifying this means who got the better strategy is irrelevant as it's fuel corrected anyway. For the h2h though yeah the fuel preference makes a difference at the beginning of the season which is one of the reasons I don't think Alonso got the better of Lewis, quite the opposite. The point I'm making is the closeness of it whether we use the direct 2007 comparison or the only other 4 comparable seasons.

Thirdly, I don't know how many times I have to say it within one discussion but I'm not writing off or discounting Lewis's success in a dominant car, not even remotely so, I'm saying comparing his performance in a run in while in a dominant car in a two horse race and comparing it against a run in with the 2/3rd or 3rd/4th best car and increased competition is as lopsided a comparison as you can get with no wonder you get the impression you do from it.

I don't understand the notion that the 2007 season is seen as Hamilton's pinnacle, a driver new to F1 and learning the ropes, it's quite clear that he improved throughout the season, at the beginning of the season he was out qualified by Alonso 4-1 fuel corrected, after that he was out qualifying Alonso more often than not.

In respect to Silverstone Hamilton had to miss the testing there just prior to the race due to McLaren sponsorship commitments, crazy to think that could happen, anyway Alonso found a set up that he was able to keep secret from Hamilton because of that point he was able to stop Hamilton from copying his set up.


If we're just doing strawmen then I've no idea where this notion Alonso was 31, in a Renault on Michelins with Hitco brakes in 2007 when Lewis beat him is coming from either. It's really weird, isn't it?

_________________
"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: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5024
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:


Firstly, I was talking about comparable cars and yes it's just one element but it's a pretty important one. I did say points don't tell the whole story as well which is why I also talked about who I felt performed better and pointed out for example 2010 I felt Lewis got the better of it, irrespective of what the points said. But I also think the other years Alonso did have the edge on performance to go along with the points "win" which is why I mentioned it. If it was just about the points then I wouldn't mention it for some of the reasons given or I'd see it the other way like in 2010.

Secondly whether you like Hughes's piece or not doesn't mean it's not worth mentioning in a discussion involving what the article is specifically about. He states the info comes from the teams and only counts direct comparisons which seems fair enough to me. It's a lot fairer than pointing to poles which include the likes of Silverstone where Alonso was 4ths faster fuel corrected. If it was your turn for the preferential fuel strategy on a McLaren track, you got the pole. If it was your turn on a Ferrari track, you didn't. At least Hughes makes the attempt to keep it fair and use the fuel corrected results in directly comparable situations, for qualifying this means who got the better strategy is irrelevant as it's fuel corrected anyway. For the h2h though yeah the fuel preference makes a difference at the beginning of the season which is one of the reasons I don't think Alonso got the better of Lewis, quite the opposite. The point I'm making is the closeness of it whether we use the direct 2007 comparison or the only other 4 comparable seasons.

Thirdly, I don't know how many times I have to say it within one discussion but I'm not writing off or discounting Lewis's success in a dominant car, not even remotely so, I'm saying comparing his performance in a run in while in a dominant car in a two horse race and comparing it against a run in with the 2/3rd or 3rd/4th best car and increased competition is as lopsided a comparison as you can get with no wonder you get the impression you do from it.

Any form of fuel correction is an estimate and is not accurate and, if you actually pay attention to Hughes' methodology, it's highly questionable in terms of what he includes/excludes. Did you actually watch that season? If so, are you trying to tell me that you feel Alonso got the better of the matchup? I just want to know how absurd we're getting here with all due respect.

That's not even the important part anyway. I marvel at how people perceive drivers as having good or bad seasons without realizing that much of what they are noticing is directly linked to whether or not they have a tough teammate to fight with. The perception that Alonso was particularly great at Ferrari is completely tied to his 100% control over Felipe Massa. The notion that he struggled in 2007 is 100% tied to his battle with Lewis. Likewise most people perceive Hamilton to be at his absolute peak right now but that's also largely tied to the fact that Bottas poses no real threat to him. For the first time since 2009 he's actually able to maximize his strategy and he also has the team 100% behind him rather than the split camps he's been in most of his career with other world champions.

It's not a small thing at all. It's absolutely huge and I marvel at how few people seem to realize it. We've seen the Sergio Perez effect damage multiple careers of his teammates. We've seen Raikkonen go from seeming like the fastest driver in F1 to seeming like a complete slouch relative to the top guys. This is why I cannot put Schumacher on the same footing with Senna personally. His whole career he had #1 status. Michael never had to beat another top driver in the same car at any point in his career. Having a tough teammate is like having a computer virus. At the best of times it's an annoyance but at the worst of times it's outright disastrous.


The only absurd thing is how often I'm having to repeat myself and yes I'm aware of Hughes's methodology as I bothered to read the article before posting it as bizarre as that may sound and he explains it. He explains which ones he's left out and which sessions the data was taken from in the comments section and nothing jumps out as being fishy. You can obviously doubt him, that's your right of course. For the second time no, I don't think Alonso got the better of it in 2007, I do think it was as close as the stats suggest though and yes I was watching.

Having a comfortable team setting is very important I agree but no the perception Alonso's time at Ferrari being great isn't based on having control over Massa, at least not for me. It's based on his own performances during the time versus his main rivals more than any one single thing. I didn't need Button having a good season to tell me Lewis was on it in 2012 either. Drivers can have poorer seasons with a comfortable setting (2008) just as often as having a good one without (2012) in my experience. Other influences like the car's competitiveness and your rivals car competitiveness, where you are in the title picture and who you are fighting with are as big of influences on how a driver performs as his setting in the team imo but I do think it's important and the best way to approach this game for as long as it isn't a spec series, yeah.

You know if we are going to use Hughes methodology as fact why do I never see Button used as a cross reference were Hamilton beats Alonso hands down?


Probably because it's irrelevant when discussing 2007 I'd imagine so there's no need to do so. If I was making a point of where I felt they are now then obviously I'd take it into consideration when bringing the article up.

_________________
"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: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5635
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

The only absurd thing is how often I'm having to repeat myself and yes I'm aware of Hughes's methodology as I bothered to read the article before posting it as bizarre as that may sound and he explains it. He explains which ones he's left out and which sessions the data was taken from in the comments section and nothing jumps out as being fishy. You can obviously doubt him, that's your right of course. For the second time no, I don't think Alonso got the better of it in 2007, I do think it was as close as the stats suggest though and yes I was watching.

Having a comfortable team setting is very important I agree but no the perception Alonso's time at Ferrari being great isn't based on having control over Massa, at least not for me. It's based on his own performances during the time versus his main rivals more than any one single thing. I didn't need Button having a good season to tell me Lewis was on it in 2012 either. Drivers can have poorer seasons with a comfortable setting (2008) just as often as having a good one without (2012) in my experience. Other influences like the car's competitiveness and your rivals car competitiveness, where you are in the title picture and who you are fighting with are as big of influences on how a driver performs as his setting in the team imo but I do think it's important and the best way to approach this game for as long as it isn't a spec series, yeah.

You are debunking your own positions here somewhat. You claim Hamilton's 2008 season was worse than his 2012 season despite having a non-competitive teammate in 2008 vs having Button in 2012. I agree that Hamilton's performance was near flawless in 2012 and that 2008 was perhaps his second most mistake-prone season. I also think his car in 2008 was second best while the 2012 car was match for the Red Bull on pace. None the less, he won the championship in 2008 and did not win it in 2012. Now, before you say it; not winning in 2012 was not much about Button at all and it was a lot more about the team itself but the fact is that he managed to win a WDC in a scruffy season largely because the whole team was focused on getting him there.

The thing is that I actually do think having the team behind you and in sync with you brings out the best in your performance. I do think Hamilton is performing at his very best at the moment and that Alonso was at his best in those situations too. Having internal turmoil and camps forming, distrust and paranoia is not good for any driver. Having that 100% support and not having to watch your back regarding your teammate frees you to fully focus on beating everyone else without tripping on internal politics and while employing whatever strategy you want to. When you ignore things like getting preference on pitstop strategy instead of having to wait your turn or being able to keep your teammate out on track to slow down the other guys or force them to cover him or simply being able to move your teammate out of your way when he's ahead of you on track instead of having to fight him; you are ignoring a MASSIVE advantage.

In other words, the situations that Hamilton and Alonso found themselves in following their split as teammates were night and day different. They were not comparable at all. Alonso was on a team that was 100% committed to maximizing his chances in every race; even at the expense of his teammate. Hamilton was on a team that was committed to providing an equal opportunity for both former WDC drivers; even at the expense of maximizing Lewis's results. When you claimed that they had the same chance at beating Vettel, you completely missed the mark.


I'm really not, the point being made was about performance levels of the drivers in each of those years and how they corresponded to their team environment, not about their success achieved during those particular years. Success can be affected by too many outliers in a non-spec series like the things you mention that got in the way in 2012, namely team errors and a better driver in the better car he's chasing than in 2008, two things entirely out of his control and equally important as having the sole focus of the team. His out and out performance however was greater in 2012 and I don't think that's in doubt.


I still agree it's important yeah, I just don't think it's crucial to achieving your best performance. While I'd agree that Lewis is driving better now than in say 2014 when he was in a more tense environment, I don't think it's only to do with the atmosphere within the team and strategy preference etc.. The calibre of the driver he's up against swapping around (Seb and Nico) could've brought this level out of him. Having a fight with a different team when you don't know what each others car performance is going to be for sure could've brought it out of him. Being a 4x Champ instead of a 1x could've helped him reach a better place mentally in his approach now he's not chasing Seb's numbers and his numbers are so good. Age as touched on before could play a role. There's many things that impact a drivers performance I think.


Every bit as good a chance is an exaggeration tbf yeah but I did go on to say the points didn't tell the whole story and it was the cars I found comparable. Lewis obviously had the tougher internal battle but he also invariably had the quicker car over the same period which is still important for obvious reasons, it's not like it went south all the time and those times it didn't he had an advantage in pace. You're never going to get a perfect comparison even in the same team with reliability and things like that outside their control so comparable has to have some wiggle room. I think we'd both class last years title fight as comparable cars but I'm sure there are Ferrari fans who'd strongly disagree with me on that one too for reasons x,y and z.

In what way is Lewis driving better now than in 2014? In what way is Vettel any better than Rosberg? For me, in closely matched machinery, Rosebrg has twice put up a better fight than Vettel these last two years. I'd also say that Lewis never really put a wheel wrong in 2014. This is basically what I'm talking about. Perception is a funny thing.

Let me make a few points about the whole Alonso thing. So much of the propping up of Alonso ignores the unpredictability of racing. For example, let's replace Alonso with Hamilton at McLaren these last couple of years. Do you foresee any change to the nature of how he would match up to his teammate? I sure as hell don't. The car would still be terrible and Vandoorne would still be miles off his teammate.

But let's also replace Hamilton with Alonso during the years where he and Rosberg were fighting for championships. Can you say with confidence that Alonso would come out on top every time? Are you confident that he could out-qualify Rosberg? Are you confident that he could beat Nico in the points even though, most of the time, Rosberg would be able to take second place no matter how much better Alonso performed on the day? Are you confident that he wouldn't have substantially worse luck with reliability or other factors outside of his control? The fact is that you (and I) have absolutely no idea how that matchup would go in those circumstances. None whatsoever. To hear the "Alonso would do _____" crowd, you'd think that F1 races were conducted in a sterile laboratory. Sometimes fluke occurrences have an impact. Sometimes the better driver loses. So the whole "he would do this" or "he would do that" argument holds very little weight because you simply don't actually know. The fact is that Alonso has in the past struggled with teammates who are strong qualifiers and it has created friction within his teams in 2004 and 2007. Alonso has also not always come through with his title chances so to claim he would easily have won the titles Lewis did is just a bunch of chit chat. The only thing that matters is what you do, not what people think you could do.

Was Alonso impressive in the 2011-2013 window? Yes he was. If we're only looking at those three years, I'd say he would have to be considered F1's top performer during that window of time. The problem is that there have been many seasons both before and after that and the Alonso fans seem to want to suggest that those three years are the only ones that actually matter. As great as Alonso was during that window, for me, Hamilton has been better these last several years (at about the same age as Alonso was then - not coincidentally).


In the way he isn't making the small mistakes in qualifying and getting out qualified, isn't spinning or making errors during any races and just looks all round at the top of his game. I think generally Seb is quicker and more consistent than Nico, especially in the wet. He's also stronger wheel to wheel though not a big strength of either. Perception is funny yes like how Nico is now held up as some sort of top tier driver instead of the guy even in his championship year that got beat by a McHonda one race, got outscored over a sizeable part of the season by Ricciardo, showed all the race craft of a drunk blind guy with Lewis wheel to wheel on multiple occasions and needed Lewis getting too blasè about finding a workaround on the clutch issue to actually win the title.


I think part of the issue here is your own refusal to accept your own biases, we all have them. You can readily sum up in a line how Lewis would do what Alonso is doing in the McLaren"s no question but the thought of Alonso beating Nico Rosberg in a two horse race is somehow now a monumental task you're just not sure about. You were half right, we do have absolutely no idea how it would go for sure but that goes for Lewis's situation if he was in Alonso's shoes too. Just because it's easy for you to say it so concretely one way but not the other doesn't mean that's how others see it who are trying to look through both eyes. And lets not pretend Lewis hadn't had friction with his teams, he's had more than Alonso (Alo,But and Nico) so I've no idea what that's supposed to mean, neither of them are the poster child for harmony within teams when they feel slighted. You're just again excusing one and not the other.

Agree about that time period but I don't think anyone's holding them up as the only ones that matter, 2007 matters as does every other year if we're talking in a wider who's better discussion of course but when it comes to direct comparisons we have such few between them because of their cars so the times they did have anything near similar paced cars is going to be looked at and those happened to include those years. They should be discussed with full context on both sides though obviously.

Your characterization of Rosberg seems pretty passionate (and completely biased). Hamilton wasn't out-qualified in 2014 because of mistakes. It was because Rosberg intentionally set up his car for a single lap and not the race; hoping that track position would be enough to win the races. Aside from the spin trying for the overcut in Brazil (which basically just cost him a few seconds) name me a significant driving error from Lewis that year? Insulting Rosberg's racecraft while touting Vettel's in a year where Vettel is bottling the championship due to his own racecraft is a bit ironic don't you think? Your comment about Vettel having more pace is 100% baseless. You have no idea how those two match up in terms of raw speed.

As to the hypothetical situation swap; I just want to make sure I'm understanding you. Are you suggesting that you feel Vandoorne (a driver washing out of F1 just two years into his career for lack of performance) would have beaten Hamilton in the same car? How about Alonso vs Stroll? Who do you think would win that? The Vandoorne part was a given Lotus. The Roberg part is a completely different story. Do you think Vandoorne could ahve beaten Michael Schumacher in the same car three years running? Are you trying to equate him with Rosebrg.

And again, the time period you are harping on is NOT one in which they were in comparable situations. It is not more pertinent than any other time period nor does it give you a more meaningful comparison between them. 2007 carries more weight than any other year only because the machinery was not a variable but in 2011-2013 they were in totally different situations and at totally different points in their career. You choose to look that small window of three years because it's literally the only window of time since Hamilton came into the sport where Alonso looks better. The fact is that they've both had had ups and downs in their careers. They've both had brilliant seasons and they've both had some disappointments. The bottom line is that Hamilton has achieved MUCH more success and he beat Alonso when they were teammates.

Anyway, we obviously don't agree. I suppose we could agree on that...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28746
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
It's not nonsense, it happened. And I did say comparable cars rather than comparable situations but even if we ignore those 4 seasons and only look at 2007 the picture doesn't change any, it's still ridiculously close with Hughes having Alonso a smidge faster fuel corrected and ahead in the head 2 head as well, equal on points and only beaten on countback. As for a car being roughly equal despite being slower in 14 out of 19 well it can't be that surprising to you as you feel a car that got outqualified 15-5 was actually quicker last year, never mind roughly equal. And I don't think those figures are accurate anyway, it was more like 10-9 or 11-8 going by qualifying (To Ferrari).

You miss out they dominated in the second half or overturned a deficit in the second half with quicker cars which is quite important. That Alonso's cars were more competitive in the first half of 2005/6 is all we need to know. The removal of the J Damper and Ferrari improving is why he was less competitive in the second half rather than any wobbles in the run in for 06. That you were comparing them to Lewis's efforts in a dominant car during a run in against one guy was the issue in the first place, it's completely lop sided in Lewis's favour so of course it'll look better. And I don't want them written off, I just think it's a poor comparison to anything other than another dominant car comparison point.

The last two years I left out because they aren't dominant cars and so the comparison to the likes of 2005 and 2006 are fine as they're at least similar enough conditions with it being between two teams who alternated who had the best car any given race so it works. 2007 works too for the same reason. 2010 and 2012 don't for blindingly obvious reasons.

Let's be clear about a few things. First of all, the pace of the car is just one element. If Heikki Kovaleinen had stayed at McLaren, you'd have a point in comparing Hamilton and Alonso's points totals during this window of 3-4 years that you seem to think are the only period of time that matters but the fact is that he didn't. As such, Hamilton's situation was not at all comparable on the level of looking at points. This is not something to sweep under the rug. If, for example, Roseberg were to have remained at Mercedes these last two years, Hamilton's chances of winning these titles would have decreased dramatically due to the simple fact that, when the Mercedes car was strongest, Hamilton wouldn't always be the one to truly capitalize. It's simple mathematics. That's why Vettel was so upset after qualifying at Monza and it's why Alonso had a meltdown in 2007. Having #1 status is every bit as important as having a quick car. Losing points to your teammate (unless you have the dominant car) means losing the championship.

Secondly I already discussed your attempts to try to pass off this news article as some sort of authoritative assessment. What Hughes fails to mention is that, from the time they began alternating fuel strategy, Hamilton out-qualified Alonso 8-4 and had 6 pole positions to Alonso's 1. Hamilton also firmly took control of the matchup for the vast majority of the season; with the points becoming artificially close after the disastrous last 2 races. Trying to pass off 2007 as a year where Alonso got the better of Hamilton is a joke frankly speaking.

Third, you wanting to discount Hamilton's success when in a dominant car is also not very sensible. Do we discount Senna's success in 1988? The pace gap between him and Prost was actually MUCH bigger than the gap between Hamilton and Rosebrg and the gap from McLaren to the next team was just as big. This is a common theme with the Alonso crowd; seeking to discredit the championships that others have won while talking up the non-championships for Alonso and blaming the car...



Firstly, I was talking about comparable cars and yes it's just one element but it's a pretty important one. I did say points don't tell the whole story as well which is why I also talked about who I felt performed better and pointed out for example 2010 I felt Lewis got the better of it, irrespective of what the points said. But I also think the other years Alonso did have the edge on performance to go along with the points "win" which is why I mentioned it. If it was just about the points then I wouldn't mention it for some of the reasons given or I'd see it the other way like in 2010.

Secondly whether you like Hughes's piece or not doesn't mean it's not worth mentioning in a discussion involving what the article is specifically about. He states the info comes from the teams and only counts direct comparisons which seems fair enough to me. It's a lot fairer than pointing to poles which include the likes of Silverstone where Alonso was 4ths faster fuel corrected. If it was your turn for the preferential fuel strategy on a McLaren track, you got the pole. If it was your turn on a Ferrari track, you didn't. At least Hughes makes the attempt to keep it fair and use the fuel corrected results in directly comparable situations, for qualifying this means who got the better strategy is irrelevant as it's fuel corrected anyway. For the h2h though yeah the fuel preference makes a difference at the beginning of the season which is one of the reasons I don't think Alonso got the better of Lewis, quite the opposite. The point I'm making is the closeness of it whether we use the direct 2007 comparison or the only other 4 comparable seasons.

Thirdly, I don't know how many times I have to say it within one discussion but I'm not writing off or discounting Lewis's success in a dominant car, not even remotely so, I'm saying comparing his performance in a run in while in a dominant car in a two horse race and comparing it against a run in with the 2/3rd or 3rd/4th best car and increased competition is as lopsided a comparison as you can get with no wonder you get the impression you do from it.

I don't understand the notion that the 2007 season is seen as Hamilton's pinnacle, a driver new to F1 and learning the ropes, it's quite clear that he improved throughout the season, at the beginning of the season he was out qualified by Alonso 4-1 fuel corrected, after that he was out qualifying Alonso more often than not.

In respect to Silverstone Hamilton had to miss the testing there just prior to the race due to McLaren sponsorship commitments, crazy to think that could happen, anyway Alonso found a set up that he was able to keep secret from Hamilton because of that point he was able to stop Hamilton from copying his set up.


If we're just doing strawmen then I've no idea where this notion Alonso was 31, in a Renault on Michelins with Hitco brakes in 2007 when Lewis beat him is coming from either. It's really weird, isn't it?

He was a double world champion having just beat the great Michael Schumacher fair and square, yet in 2007 he was just as disadvantaged as a rookie driver?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 9:08 pm
Posts: 1584
I've thought for years that Hamilton is a better driver than Vettel.
Hamilton is capable of driving cars in many different ways. When he had a bad car, he could still drive it hard and would tend to get more from it than his team mate. He is also ruthless - which is an advantage in F1.

Vettel seems to be very good when the car is the type he likes and qualifying is a big, big part of racing.

I rate a few current and recent drivers higher than Vettel.

You cannot drive faster than the car can, but you can drive slower than the car can. Recently, with tyres being so fickle, having the ability to sort a car to get maximum performance has become more difficult. Hamilton has more capability to drive the car in various ways, and may get to the right driving style when others can't. Having said that, I don't think he is always as good at sorting the car as his range of driving should allow.

Hamilton's epic pole lap at Singapore 2018 - Vettel did something similar in 2015.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28746
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:


Firstly, I was talking about comparable cars and yes it's just one element but it's a pretty important one. I did say points don't tell the whole story as well which is why I also talked about who I felt performed better and pointed out for example 2010 I felt Lewis got the better of it, irrespective of what the points said. But I also think the other years Alonso did have the edge on performance to go along with the points "win" which is why I mentioned it. If it was just about the points then I wouldn't mention it for some of the reasons given or I'd see it the other way like in 2010.

Secondly whether you like Hughes's piece or not doesn't mean it's not worth mentioning in a discussion involving what the article is specifically about. He states the info comes from the teams and only counts direct comparisons which seems fair enough to me. It's a lot fairer than pointing to poles which include the likes of Silverstone where Alonso was 4ths faster fuel corrected. If it was your turn for the preferential fuel strategy on a McLaren track, you got the pole. If it was your turn on a Ferrari track, you didn't. At least Hughes makes the attempt to keep it fair and use the fuel corrected results in directly comparable situations, for qualifying this means who got the better strategy is irrelevant as it's fuel corrected anyway. For the h2h though yeah the fuel preference makes a difference at the beginning of the season which is one of the reasons I don't think Alonso got the better of Lewis, quite the opposite. The point I'm making is the closeness of it whether we use the direct 2007 comparison or the only other 4 comparable seasons.

Thirdly, I don't know how many times I have to say it within one discussion but I'm not writing off or discounting Lewis's success in a dominant car, not even remotely so, I'm saying comparing his performance in a run in while in a dominant car in a two horse race and comparing it against a run in with the 2/3rd or 3rd/4th best car and increased competition is as lopsided a comparison as you can get with no wonder you get the impression you do from it.

Any form of fuel correction is an estimate and is not accurate and, if you actually pay attention to Hughes' methodology, it's highly questionable in terms of what he includes/excludes. Did you actually watch that season? If so, are you trying to tell me that you feel Alonso got the better of the matchup? I just want to know how absurd we're getting here with all due respect.

That's not even the important part anyway. I marvel at how people perceive drivers as having good or bad seasons without realizing that much of what they are noticing is directly linked to whether or not they have a tough teammate to fight with. The perception that Alonso was particularly great at Ferrari is completely tied to his 100% control over Felipe Massa. The notion that he struggled in 2007 is 100% tied to his battle with Lewis. Likewise most people perceive Hamilton to be at his absolute peak right now but that's also largely tied to the fact that Bottas poses no real threat to him. For the first time since 2009 he's actually able to maximize his strategy and he also has the team 100% behind him rather than the split camps he's been in most of his career with other world champions.

It's not a small thing at all. It's absolutely huge and I marvel at how few people seem to realize it. We've seen the Sergio Perez effect damage multiple careers of his teammates. We've seen Raikkonen go from seeming like the fastest driver in F1 to seeming like a complete slouch relative to the top guys. This is why I cannot put Schumacher on the same footing with Senna personally. His whole career he had #1 status. Michael never had to beat another top driver in the same car at any point in his career. Having a tough teammate is like having a computer virus. At the best of times it's an annoyance but at the worst of times it's outright disastrous.


The only absurd thing is how often I'm having to repeat myself and yes I'm aware of Hughes's methodology as I bothered to read the article before posting it as bizarre as that may sound and he explains it. He explains which ones he's left out and which sessions the data was taken from in the comments section and nothing jumps out as being fishy. You can obviously doubt him, that's your right of course. For the second time no, I don't think Alonso got the better of it in 2007, I do think it was as close as the stats suggest though and yes I was watching.

Having a comfortable team setting is very important I agree but no the perception Alonso's time at Ferrari being great isn't based on having control over Massa, at least not for me. It's based on his own performances during the time versus his main rivals more than any one single thing. I didn't need Button having a good season to tell me Lewis was on it in 2012 either. Drivers can have poorer seasons with a comfortable setting (2008) just as often as having a good one without (2012) in my experience. Other influences like the car's competitiveness and your rivals car competitiveness, where you are in the title picture and who you are fighting with are as big of influences on how a driver performs as his setting in the team imo but I do think it's important and the best way to approach this game for as long as it isn't a spec series, yeah.

You know if we are going to use Hughes methodology as fact why do I never see Button used as a cross reference were Hamilton beats Alonso hands down?


Probably because it's irrelevant when discussing 2007 I'd imagine so there's no need to do so. If I was making a point of where I felt they are now then obviously I'd take it into consideration when bringing the article up.

I know you've not made a big thing about it but it's just a thing I've noticed that the Hughes article gets brought up about 2007 but the Button comparison never does, don't you think though that it might be relevant when discussing Alonso's Ferrari years to show how high the level of performance that Hamilton had during those years 2010-2012?

These are the years you have been discussing with sandman and without doubt it's much easier to maximise your performance with a subservient teammate than a higher performing Jenson, I'm not a #2 driver, Button.

The model that Alonso had is the one to maximise WDC success, it's the model that Schumacher had and similar to what Vettel has now, also it's the one Hamilton presently has to go all out for the WDC but not one he ever had 2010-2013.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5024
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
You are debunking your own positions here somewhat. You claim Hamilton's 2008 season was worse than his 2012 season despite having a non-competitive teammate in 2008 vs having Button in 2012. I agree that Hamilton's performance was near flawless in 2012 and that 2008 was perhaps his second most mistake-prone season. I also think his car in 2008 was second best while the 2012 car was match for the Red Bull on pace. None the less, he won the championship in 2008 and did not win it in 2012. Now, before you say it; not winning in 2012 was not much about Button at all and it was a lot more about the team itself but the fact is that he managed to win a WDC in a scruffy season largely because the whole team was focused on getting him there.

The thing is that I actually do think having the team behind you and in sync with you brings out the best in your performance. I do think Hamilton is performing at his very best at the moment and that Alonso was at his best in those situations too. Having internal turmoil and camps forming, distrust and paranoia is not good for any driver. Having that 100% support and not having to watch your back regarding your teammate frees you to fully focus on beating everyone else without tripping on internal politics and while employing whatever strategy you want to. When you ignore things like getting preference on pitstop strategy instead of having to wait your turn or being able to keep your teammate out on track to slow down the other guys or force them to cover him or simply being able to move your teammate out of your way when he's ahead of you on track instead of having to fight him; you are ignoring a MASSIVE advantage.

In other words, the situations that Hamilton and Alonso found themselves in following their split as teammates were night and day different. They were not comparable at all. Alonso was on a team that was 100% committed to maximizing his chances in every race; even at the expense of his teammate. Hamilton was on a team that was committed to providing an equal opportunity for both former WDC drivers; even at the expense of maximizing Lewis's results. When you claimed that they had the same chance at beating Vettel, you completely missed the mark.


I'm really not, the point being made was about performance levels of the drivers in each of those years and how they corresponded to their team environment, not about their success achieved during those particular years. Success can be affected by too many outliers in a non-spec series like the things you mention that got in the way in 2012, namely team errors and a better driver in the better car he's chasing than in 2008, two things entirely out of his control and equally important as having the sole focus of the team. His out and out performance however was greater in 2012 and I don't think that's in doubt.


I still agree it's important yeah, I just don't think it's crucial to achieving your best performance. While I'd agree that Lewis is driving better now than in say 2014 when he was in a more tense environment, I don't think it's only to do with the atmosphere within the team and strategy preference etc.. The calibre of the driver he's up against swapping around (Seb and Nico) could've brought this level out of him. Having a fight with a different team when you don't know what each others car performance is going to be for sure could've brought it out of him. Being a 4x Champ instead of a 1x could've helped him reach a better place mentally in his approach now he's not chasing Seb's numbers and his numbers are so good. Age as touched on before could play a role. There's many things that impact a drivers performance I think.


Every bit as good a chance is an exaggeration tbf yeah but I did go on to say the points didn't tell the whole story and it was the cars I found comparable. Lewis obviously had the tougher internal battle but he also invariably had the quicker car over the same period which is still important for obvious reasons, it's not like it went south all the time and those times it didn't he had an advantage in pace. You're never going to get a perfect comparison even in the same team with reliability and things like that outside their control so comparable has to have some wiggle room. I think we'd both class last years title fight as comparable cars but I'm sure there are Ferrari fans who'd strongly disagree with me on that one too for reasons x,y and z.

In what way is Lewis driving better now than in 2014? In what way is Vettel any better than Rosberg? For me, in closely matched machinery, Rosebrg has twice put up a better fight than Vettel these last two years. I'd also say that Lewis never really put a wheel wrong in 2014. This is basically what I'm talking about. Perception is a funny thing.

Let me make a few points about the whole Alonso thing. So much of the propping up of Alonso ignores the unpredictability of racing. For example, let's replace Alonso with Hamilton at McLaren these last couple of years. Do you foresee any change to the nature of how he would match up to his teammate? I sure as hell don't. The car would still be terrible and Vandoorne would still be miles off his teammate.

But let's also replace Hamilton with Alonso during the years where he and Rosberg were fighting for championships. Can you say with confidence that Alonso would come out on top every time? Are you confident that he could out-qualify Rosberg? Are you confident that he could beat Nico in the points even though, most of the time, Rosberg would be able to take second place no matter how much better Alonso performed on the day? Are you confident that he wouldn't have substantially worse luck with reliability or other factors outside of his control? The fact is that you (and I) have absolutely no idea how that matchup would go in those circumstances. None whatsoever. To hear the "Alonso would do _____" crowd, you'd think that F1 races were conducted in a sterile laboratory. Sometimes fluke occurrences have an impact. Sometimes the better driver loses. So the whole "he would do this" or "he would do that" argument holds very little weight because you simply don't actually know. The fact is that Alonso has in the past struggled with teammates who are strong qualifiers and it has created friction within his teams in 2004 and 2007. Alonso has also not always come through with his title chances so to claim he would easily have won the titles Lewis did is just a bunch of chit chat. The only thing that matters is what you do, not what people think you could do.

Was Alonso impressive in the 2011-2013 window? Yes he was. If we're only looking at those three years, I'd say he would have to be considered F1's top performer during that window of time. The problem is that there have been many seasons both before and after that and the Alonso fans seem to want to suggest that those three years are the only ones that actually matter. As great as Alonso was during that window, for me, Hamilton has been better these last several years (at about the same age as Alonso was then - not coincidentally).


In the way he isn't making the small mistakes in qualifying and getting out qualified, isn't spinning or making errors during any races and just looks all round at the top of his game. I think generally Seb is quicker and more consistent than Nico, especially in the wet. He's also stronger wheel to wheel though not a big strength of either. Perception is funny yes like how Nico is now held up as some sort of top tier driver instead of the guy even in his championship year that got beat by a McHonda one race, got outscored over a sizeable part of the season by Ricciardo, showed all the race craft of a drunk blind guy with Lewis wheel to wheel on multiple occasions and needed Lewis getting too blasè about finding a workaround on the clutch issue to actually win the title.


I think part of the issue here is your own refusal to accept your own biases, we all have them. You can readily sum up in a line how Lewis would do what Alonso is doing in the McLaren"s no question but the thought of Alonso beating Nico Rosberg in a two horse race is somehow now a monumental task you're just not sure about. You were half right, we do have absolutely no idea how it would go for sure but that goes for Lewis's situation if he was in Alonso's shoes too. Just because it's easy for you to say it so concretely one way but not the other doesn't mean that's how others see it who are trying to look through both eyes. And lets not pretend Lewis hadn't had friction with his teams, he's had more than Alonso (Alo,But and Nico) so I've no idea what that's supposed to mean, neither of them are the poster child for harmony within teams when they feel slighted. You're just again excusing one and not the other.

Agree about that time period but I don't think anyone's holding them up as the only ones that matter, 2007 matters as does every other year if we're talking in a wider who's better discussion of course but when it comes to direct comparisons we have such few between them because of their cars so the times they did have anything near similar paced cars is going to be looked at and those happened to include those years. They should be discussed with full context on both sides though obviously.

Your characterization of Rosberg seems pretty passionate (and completely biased). Hamilton wasn't out-qualified in 2014 because of mistakes. It was because Rosberg intentionally set up his car for a single lap and not the race; hoping that track position would be enough to win the races. Aside from the spin trying for the overcut in Brazil (which basically just cost him a few seconds) name me a significant driving error from Lewis that year? Insulting Rosberg's racecraft while touting Vettel's in a year where Vettel is bottling the championship due to his own racecraft is a bit ironic don't you think? Your comment about Vettel having more pace is 100% baseless. You have no idea how those two match up in terms of raw speed.

As to the hypothetical situation swap; I just want to make sure I'm understanding you. Are you suggesting that you feel Vandoorne (a driver washing out of F1 just two years into his career for lack of performance) would have beaten Hamilton in the same car? How about Alonso vs Stroll? Who do you think would win that? The Vandoorne part was a given Lotus. The Roberg part is a completely different story. Do you think Vandoorne could ahve beaten Michael Schumacher in the same car three years running? Are you trying to equate him with Rosebrg.

And again, the time period you are harping on is NOT one in which they were in comparable situations. It is not more pertinent than any other time period nor does it give you a more meaningful comparison between them. 2007 carries more weight than any other year only because the machinery was not a variable but in 2011-2013 they were in totally different situations and at totally different points in their career. You choose to look that small window of three years because it's literally the only window of time since Hamilton came into the sport where Alonso looks better. The fact is that they've both had had ups and downs in their careers. They've both had brilliant seasons and they've both had some disappointments. The bottom line is that Hamilton has achieved MUCH more success and he beat Alonso when they were teammates.

Anyway, we obviously don't agree. I suppose we could agree on that...


And also accurate but yes I'm salty about Nico, you might've forgot but I like Lewis too. He made some mistakes, certainly more than this year. He had a spin in Hungary as well which he was lucky to get away with. No irony, I pointed out it wasn't a great strength for either imo but I've seen less clumsiness from Seb overall in those situations. No I don't know 100% for a fact, none of us do, it's just my take on it.

No I don't think Vandoorne would beat Lewis and nor did I say so but you said yourself in another thread Lewis lacks when he's either too comfortable or too far away. He certainly can't phone in a performance as we see once he clinches a title, he can't beat a team mate for love nor money it seems. To be clear it's not from Stoff's side any doubt about Lewis matching Alonso's performance comes from but from questions I'd have about Lewis's form,state of mind or whatever if he was marooned at the back watching Seb break the records or Nico surpass his stats. I'm not even convinced he'd stay around in the Sport to watch that, although I think more likely a deal would be done to get him out of there and into the front probably. You just act like it's a given he can do what Alonso has done these past years but it's not for Alonso and I just don't view it as cut and dry as that but you accuse others of doing exactly what you're doing and just assuming Lewis can.

One of the reasons it may feel like I'm harping on is the absurd amount of time I have to spend repeating myself and fighting through all the strawmen. Again, comparable cars not situations. And again, no I don't give it any more weight than other years in isolation but you can bury your head in the sand about that period all you want but I'm not picking them out because Alonso got the better of it, I'm stating the fact it is the only other time period outside of 2007 that they were in anything close to comparable machinery. That's not my problem the results went the way they did but I can't make the 2008/2009 or Turbo era cars any closer to each other in performance through wishful thinking alone, as much as I'd like to for pretty obvious reasons. Or even better an actual dominant car for Alonso to enjoy for a season or two like every other top driver.

_________________
"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: Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5024
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Let's be clear about a few things. First of all, the pace of the car is just one element. If Heikki Kovaleinen had stayed at McLaren, you'd have a point in comparing Hamilton and Alonso's points totals during this window of 3-4 years that you seem to think are the only period of time that matters but the fact is that he didn't. As such, Hamilton's situation was not at all comparable on the level of looking at points. This is not something to sweep under the rug. If, for example, Roseberg were to have remained at Mercedes these last two years, Hamilton's chances of winning these titles would have decreased dramatically due to the simple fact that, when the Mercedes car was strongest, Hamilton wouldn't always be the one to truly capitalize. It's simple mathematics. That's why Vettel was so upset after qualifying at Monza and it's why Alonso had a meltdown in 2007. Having #1 status is every bit as important as having a quick car. Losing points to your teammate (unless you have the dominant car) means losing the championship.

Secondly I already discussed your attempts to try to pass off this news article as some sort of authoritative assessment. What Hughes fails to mention is that, from the time they began alternating fuel strategy, Hamilton out-qualified Alonso 8-4 and had 6 pole positions to Alonso's 1. Hamilton also firmly took control of the matchup for the vast majority of the season; with the points becoming artificially close after the disastrous last 2 races. Trying to pass off 2007 as a year where Alonso got the better of Hamilton is a joke frankly speaking.

Third, you wanting to discount Hamilton's success when in a dominant car is also not very sensible. Do we discount Senna's success in 1988? The pace gap between him and Prost was actually MUCH bigger than the gap between Hamilton and Rosebrg and the gap from McLaren to the next team was just as big. This is a common theme with the Alonso crowd; seeking to discredit the championships that others have won while talking up the non-championships for Alonso and blaming the car...



Firstly, I was talking about comparable cars and yes it's just one element but it's a pretty important one. I did say points don't tell the whole story as well which is why I also talked about who I felt performed better and pointed out for example 2010 I felt Lewis got the better of it, irrespective of what the points said. But I also think the other years Alonso did have the edge on performance to go along with the points "win" which is why I mentioned it. If it was just about the points then I wouldn't mention it for some of the reasons given or I'd see it the other way like in 2010.

Secondly whether you like Hughes's piece or not doesn't mean it's not worth mentioning in a discussion involving what the article is specifically about. He states the info comes from the teams and only counts direct comparisons which seems fair enough to me. It's a lot fairer than pointing to poles which include the likes of Silverstone where Alonso was 4ths faster fuel corrected. If it was your turn for the preferential fuel strategy on a McLaren track, you got the pole. If it was your turn on a Ferrari track, you didn't. At least Hughes makes the attempt to keep it fair and use the fuel corrected results in directly comparable situations, for qualifying this means who got the better strategy is irrelevant as it's fuel corrected anyway. For the h2h though yeah the fuel preference makes a difference at the beginning of the season which is one of the reasons I don't think Alonso got the better of Lewis, quite the opposite. The point I'm making is the closeness of it whether we use the direct 2007 comparison or the only other 4 comparable seasons.

Thirdly, I don't know how many times I have to say it within one discussion but I'm not writing off or discounting Lewis's success in a dominant car, not even remotely so, I'm saying comparing his performance in a run in while in a dominant car in a two horse race and comparing it against a run in with the 2/3rd or 3rd/4th best car and increased competition is as lopsided a comparison as you can get with no wonder you get the impression you do from it.

I don't understand the notion that the 2007 season is seen as Hamilton's pinnacle, a driver new to F1 and learning the ropes, it's quite clear that he improved throughout the season, at the beginning of the season he was out qualified by Alonso 4-1 fuel corrected, after that he was out qualifying Alonso more often than not.

In respect to Silverstone Hamilton had to miss the testing there just prior to the race due to McLaren sponsorship commitments, crazy to think that could happen, anyway Alonso found a set up that he was able to keep secret from Hamilton because of that point he was able to stop Hamilton from copying his set up.


If we're just doing strawmen then I've no idea where this notion Alonso was 31, in a Renault on Michelins with Hitco brakes in 2007 when Lewis beat him is coming from either. It's really weird, isn't it?

He was a double world champion having just beat the great Michael Schumacher fair and square, yet in 2007 he was just as disadvantaged as a rookie driver?


Yes I'm saying Schumacher was responsible for the JFK assassination, what of it? :uhoh:

So much straw.

_________________
"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: Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5024
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Any form of fuel correction is an estimate and is not accurate and, if you actually pay attention to Hughes' methodology, it's highly questionable in terms of what he includes/excludes. Did you actually watch that season? If so, are you trying to tell me that you feel Alonso got the better of the matchup? I just want to know how absurd we're getting here with all due respect.

That's not even the important part anyway. I marvel at how people perceive drivers as having good or bad seasons without realizing that much of what they are noticing is directly linked to whether or not they have a tough teammate to fight with. The perception that Alonso was particularly great at Ferrari is completely tied to his 100% control over Felipe Massa. The notion that he struggled in 2007 is 100% tied to his battle with Lewis. Likewise most people perceive Hamilton to be at his absolute peak right now but that's also largely tied to the fact that Bottas poses no real threat to him. For the first time since 2009 he's actually able to maximize his strategy and he also has the team 100% behind him rather than the split camps he's been in most of his career with other world champions.

It's not a small thing at all. It's absolutely huge and I marvel at how few people seem to realize it. We've seen the Sergio Perez effect damage multiple careers of his teammates. We've seen Raikkonen go from seeming like the fastest driver in F1 to seeming like a complete slouch relative to the top guys. This is why I cannot put Schumacher on the same footing with Senna personally. His whole career he had #1 status. Michael never had to beat another top driver in the same car at any point in his career. Having a tough teammate is like having a computer virus. At the best of times it's an annoyance but at the worst of times it's outright disastrous.


The only absurd thing is how often I'm having to repeat myself and yes I'm aware of Hughes's methodology as I bothered to read the article before posting it as bizarre as that may sound and he explains it. He explains which ones he's left out and which sessions the data was taken from in the comments section and nothing jumps out as being fishy. You can obviously doubt him, that's your right of course. For the second time no, I don't think Alonso got the better of it in 2007, I do think it was as close as the stats suggest though and yes I was watching.

Having a comfortable team setting is very important I agree but no the perception Alonso's time at Ferrari being great isn't based on having control over Massa, at least not for me. It's based on his own performances during the time versus his main rivals more than any one single thing. I didn't need Button having a good season to tell me Lewis was on it in 2012 either. Drivers can have poorer seasons with a comfortable setting (2008) just as often as having a good one without (2012) in my experience. Other influences like the car's competitiveness and your rivals car competitiveness, where you are in the title picture and who you are fighting with are as big of influences on how a driver performs as his setting in the team imo but I do think it's important and the best way to approach this game for as long as it isn't a spec series, yeah.

You know if we are going to use Hughes methodology as fact why do I never see Button used as a cross reference were Hamilton beats Alonso hands down?


Probably because it's irrelevant when discussing 2007 I'd imagine so there's no need to do so. If I was making a point of where I felt they are now then obviously I'd take it into consideration when bringing the article up.

I know you've not made a big thing about it but it's just a thing I've noticed that the Hughes article gets brought up about 2007 but the Button comparison never does, don't you think though that it might be relevant when discussing Alonso's Ferrari years to show how high the level of performance that Hamilton had during those years 2010-2012?

These are the years you have been discussing with sandman and without doubt it's much easier to maximise your performance with a subservient teammate than a higher performing Jenson, I'm not a #2 driver, Button.

The model that Alonso had is the one to maximise WDC success, it's the model that Schumacher had and similar to what Vettel has now, also it's the one Hamilton presently has to go all out for the WDC but not one he ever had 2010-2013.


Every time the article is brought up you mention the Button thing so it's not like it's being underrepresented here. Yes I think Lewis was operating at a high level in 2010 and 2012 at least yeah, 2012 was a particularly bad year for JB though it has to be said and like we talked about the last time we discussed the article, the state of the McHonda,JB joining a new team in the Lewis comparison versus Alonso joining a new team would all have to be considered too but it's absolutely relevant,yes. As is the differing team dynamics, absolutely. Along with car performance too, rule set etc..

Nothing should be left out.

_________________
"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: Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5635
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
In what way is Lewis driving better now than in 2014? In what way is Vettel any better than Rosberg? For me, in closely matched machinery, Rosebrg has twice put up a better fight than Vettel these last two years. I'd also say that Lewis never really put a wheel wrong in 2014. This is basically what I'm talking about. Perception is a funny thing.

Let me make a few points about the whole Alonso thing. So much of the propping up of Alonso ignores the unpredictability of racing. For example, let's replace Alonso with Hamilton at McLaren these last couple of years. Do you foresee any change to the nature of how he would match up to his teammate? I sure as hell don't. The car would still be terrible and Vandoorne would still be miles off his teammate.

But let's also replace Hamilton with Alonso during the years where he and Rosberg were fighting for championships. Can you say with confidence that Alonso would come out on top every time? Are you confident that he could out-qualify Rosberg? Are you confident that he could beat Nico in the points even though, most of the time, Rosberg would be able to take second place no matter how much better Alonso performed on the day? Are you confident that he wouldn't have substantially worse luck with reliability or other factors outside of his control? The fact is that you (and I) have absolutely no idea how that matchup would go in those circumstances. None whatsoever. To hear the "Alonso would do _____" crowd, you'd think that F1 races were conducted in a sterile laboratory. Sometimes fluke occurrences have an impact. Sometimes the better driver loses. So the whole "he would do this" or "he would do that" argument holds very little weight because you simply don't actually know. The fact is that Alonso has in the past struggled with teammates who are strong qualifiers and it has created friction within his teams in 2004 and 2007. Alonso has also not always come through with his title chances so to claim he would easily have won the titles Lewis did is just a bunch of chit chat. The only thing that matters is what you do, not what people think you could do.

Was Alonso impressive in the 2011-2013 window? Yes he was. If we're only looking at those three years, I'd say he would have to be considered F1's top performer during that window of time. The problem is that there have been many seasons both before and after that and the Alonso fans seem to want to suggest that those three years are the only ones that actually matter. As great as Alonso was during that window, for me, Hamilton has been better these last several years (at about the same age as Alonso was then - not coincidentally).


In the way he isn't making the small mistakes in qualifying and getting out qualified, isn't spinning or making errors during any races and just looks all round at the top of his game. I think generally Seb is quicker and more consistent than Nico, especially in the wet. He's also stronger wheel to wheel though not a big strength of either. Perception is funny yes like how Nico is now held up as some sort of top tier driver instead of the guy even in his championship year that got beat by a McHonda one race, got outscored over a sizeable part of the season by Ricciardo, showed all the race craft of a drunk blind guy with Lewis wheel to wheel on multiple occasions and needed Lewis getting too blasè about finding a workaround on the clutch issue to actually win the title.


I think part of the issue here is your own refusal to accept your own biases, we all have them. You can readily sum up in a line how Lewis would do what Alonso is doing in the McLaren"s no question but the thought of Alonso beating Nico Rosberg in a two horse race is somehow now a monumental task you're just not sure about. You were half right, we do have absolutely no idea how it would go for sure but that goes for Lewis's situation if he was in Alonso's shoes too. Just because it's easy for you to say it so concretely one way but not the other doesn't mean that's how others see it who are trying to look through both eyes. And lets not pretend Lewis hadn't had friction with his teams, he's had more than Alonso (Alo,But and Nico) so I've no idea what that's supposed to mean, neither of them are the poster child for harmony within teams when they feel slighted. You're just again excusing one and not the other.

Agree about that time period but I don't think anyone's holding them up as the only ones that matter, 2007 matters as does every other year if we're talking in a wider who's better discussion of course but when it comes to direct comparisons we have such few between them because of their cars so the times they did have anything near similar paced cars is going to be looked at and those happened to include those years. They should be discussed with full context on both sides though obviously.

Your characterization of Rosberg seems pretty passionate (and completely biased). Hamilton wasn't out-qualified in 2014 because of mistakes. It was because Rosberg intentionally set up his car for a single lap and not the race; hoping that track position would be enough to win the races. Aside from the spin trying for the overcut in Brazil (which basically just cost him a few seconds) name me a significant driving error from Lewis that year? Insulting Rosberg's racecraft while touting Vettel's in a year where Vettel is bottling the championship due to his own racecraft is a bit ironic don't you think? Your comment about Vettel having more pace is 100% baseless. You have no idea how those two match up in terms of raw speed.

As to the hypothetical situation swap; I just want to make sure I'm understanding you. Are you suggesting that you feel Vandoorne (a driver washing out of F1 just two years into his career for lack of performance) would have beaten Hamilton in the same car? How about Alonso vs Stroll? Who do you think would win that? The Vandoorne part was a given Lotus. The Roberg part is a completely different story. Do you think Vandoorne could ahve beaten Michael Schumacher in the same car three years running? Are you trying to equate him with Rosebrg.

And again, the time period you are harping on is NOT one in which they were in comparable situations. It is not more pertinent than any other time period nor does it give you a more meaningful comparison between them. 2007 carries more weight than any other year only because the machinery was not a variable but in 2011-2013 they were in totally different situations and at totally different points in their career. You choose to look that small window of three years because it's literally the only window of time since Hamilton came into the sport where Alonso looks better. The fact is that they've both had had ups and downs in their careers. They've both had brilliant seasons and they've both had some disappointments. The bottom line is that Hamilton has achieved MUCH more success and he beat Alonso when they were teammates.

Anyway, we obviously don't agree. I suppose we could agree on that...


And also accurate but yes I'm salty about Nico, you might've forgot but I like Lewis too. He made some mistakes, certainly more than this year. He had a spin in Hungary as well which he was lucky to get away with. No irony, I pointed out it wasn't a great strength for either imo but I've seen less clumsiness from Seb overall in those situations. No I don't know 100% for a fact, none of us do, it's just my take on it.

No I don't think Vandoorne would beat Lewis and nor did I say so but you said yourself in another thread Lewis lacks when he's either too comfortable or too far away. He certainly can't phone in a performance as we see once he clinches a title, he can't beat a team mate for love nor money it seems. To be clear it's not from Stoff's side any doubt about Lewis matching Alonso's performance comes from but from questions I'd have about Lewis's form,state of mind or whatever if he was marooned at the back watching Seb break the records or Nico surpass his stats. I'm not even convinced he'd stay around in the Sport to watch that, although I think more likely a deal would be done to get him out of there and into the front probably. You just act like it's a given he can do what Alonso has done these past years but it's not for Alonso and I just don't view it as cut and dry as that but you accuse others of doing exactly what you're doing and just assuming Lewis can.

One of the reasons it may feel like I'm harping on is the absurd amount of time I have to spend repeating myself and fighting through all the strawmen. Again, comparable cars not situations. And again, no I don't give it any more weight than other years in isolation but you can bury your head in the sand about that period all you want but I'm not picking them out because Alonso got the better of it, I'm stating the fact it is the only other time period outside of 2007 that they were in anything close to comparable machinery. That's not my problem the results went the way they did but I can't make the 2008/2009 or Turbo era cars any closer to each other in performance through wishful thinking alone, as much as I'd like to for pretty obvious reasons. Or even better an actual dominant car for Alonso to enjoy for a season or two like every other top driver.

No it's not accurate at all Lotus. There's no accuracy in saying that Rosberg has "showed all the race craft of a drunk blind guy". That's called an exaggeration and it's a biased one. Nico was FAR more consistent and handled pressure far better than Vettel. In wheel to wheel combat he may not have been a match for Lewis but he managed to fight him without bottling the car most of the time. Not sure how you can place Vettel's racecraft above Rosberg's considering the sheer amount of spacial awareness-based errors that Vettel makes.

Why do the cars have to be close in performance to compare Lewis and Alonso but the team status and situation don't have to be close? Why do you ignore bad seasons Alonso had like 2004, 2010 and 2015 but insist on including Lewis's worst season of 2011? I think you can still assess a driver's performance in seasons where they don't have a great car. The assessment is very different but I'm not buying your reasoning in the slightest. The results of those three years don't mean any more than the other 9 years where they've both been in F1 together. I'd give Alonso the better 2008, 2011 2013 and 2016. I'd Give Hamilton the better 2007, 2009, 2010, 2014, 2015, 2017 and 2018. I'd say 2012 was pretty much a wash from a driving standpoint but even if you want to give the tie to Alonso that year, I still count more years where Hamilton was better. More importantly, he was better in title fights and better in their head-to-head matchup in the same machinery. He has come through under pressure more often than Alonso and he has simply achieved more. Bench-marking both of them against Button suggests that there is a gap in pace between them at this stage that is larger than in Lewis's rookie year (which makes sense as most drivers get faster from their first year in the sport). That's my thinking. Yours seems to be that 2011-2013 matters most. So we don't see eye to eye.

The comment I made about Lewis in the other thread shows that I am NOT biased. I call it like I see it. You are taking mole hills and trying to make mountains to prop up Alonso. Fernando Alonso is a two time champ and he has had some great underdog seasons where he came close but that doesn't compare to what Lewis is achieving. A few years ago this was a real debate. It's not anymore.

Ask yourself this: if Alonso is really better than Lewis Hamilton; why doesn't anyone want him? Why doesn't Ferrari sign him? Why not Mercedes even? Why not Red Bull or Renault? All of these teams have categorically stated that they didn't consider him when hiring new drivers recently. If he's really so great, the people in F1 would know so a lot better than you or I, wouldn't they? Why are none of the top teams interested? Ferrari are losing the titles these last two years (provided they don't stage a miraculous comeback this year) despite having great cars. All signs point to Hamilton (and how he compares to Vettel) being a major factor in why they are losing. Why not go out and sign Alonso if he's actually even better than Lewis? The Alonso supporters speak with such certainty and arrogance about him seemingly based purely on a couple of scrappy title challenges that fell short. They feel he doesn't actually need to earn that praise through beating anyone. It's just gotten old.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2018 11:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28746
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
The only absurd thing is how often I'm having to repeat myself and yes I'm aware of Hughes's methodology as I bothered to read the article before posting it as bizarre as that may sound and he explains it. He explains which ones he's left out and which sessions the data was taken from in the comments section and nothing jumps out as being fishy. You can obviously doubt him, that's your right of course. For the second time no, I don't think Alonso got the better of it in 2007, I do think it was as close as the stats suggest though and yes I was watching.

Having a comfortable team setting is very important I agree but no the perception Alonso's time at Ferrari being great isn't based on having control over Massa, at least not for me. It's based on his own performances during the time versus his main rivals more than any one single thing. I didn't need Button having a good season to tell me Lewis was on it in 2012 either. Drivers can have poorer seasons with a comfortable setting (2008) just as often as having a good one without (2012) in my experience. Other influences like the car's competitiveness and your rivals car competitiveness, where you are in the title picture and who you are fighting with are as big of influences on how a driver performs as his setting in the team imo but I do think it's important and the best way to approach this game for as long as it isn't a spec series, yeah.

You know if we are going to use Hughes methodology as fact why do I never see Button used as a cross reference were Hamilton beats Alonso hands down?


Probably because it's irrelevant when discussing 2007 I'd imagine so there's no need to do so. If I was making a point of where I felt they are now then obviously I'd take it into consideration when bringing the article up.

I know you've not made a big thing about it but it's just a thing I've noticed that the Hughes article gets brought up about 2007 but the Button comparison never does, don't you think though that it might be relevant when discussing Alonso's Ferrari years to show how high the level of performance that Hamilton had during those years 2010-2012?

These are the years you have been discussing with sandman and without doubt it's much easier to maximise your performance with a subservient teammate than a higher performing Jenson, I'm not a #2 driver, Button.

The model that Alonso had is the one to maximise WDC success, it's the model that Schumacher had and similar to what Vettel has now, also it's the one Hamilton presently has to go all out for the WDC but not one he ever had 2010-2013.


Every time the article is brought up you mention the Button thing so it's not like it's being underrepresented here. Yes I think Lewis was operating at a high level in 2010 and 2012 at least yeah, 2012 was a particularly bad year for JB though it has to be said and like we talked about the last time we discussed the article, the state of the McHonda,JB joining a new team in the Lewis comparison versus Alonso joining a new team would all have to be considered too but it's absolutely relevant,yes. As is the differing team dynamics, absolutely. Along with car performance too, rule set etc..

Nothing should be left out.

It's a 3 year period that includes Hamilton's terrible season of 2011 but his stats are still better than Alonso's, so many caveats how can we come to a defining conclusion?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 12:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5024
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

In the way he isn't making the small mistakes in qualifying and getting out qualified, isn't spinning or making errors during any races and just looks all round at the top of his game. I think generally Seb is quicker and more consistent than Nico, especially in the wet. He's also stronger wheel to wheel though not a big strength of either. Perception is funny yes like how Nico is now held up as some sort of top tier driver instead of the guy even in his championship year that got beat by a McHonda one race, got outscored over a sizeable part of the season by Ricciardo, showed all the race craft of a drunk blind guy with Lewis wheel to wheel on multiple occasions and needed Lewis getting too blasè about finding a workaround on the clutch issue to actually win the title.


I think part of the issue here is your own refusal to accept your own biases, we all have them. You can readily sum up in a line how Lewis would do what Alonso is doing in the McLaren"s no question but the thought of Alonso beating Nico Rosberg in a two horse race is somehow now a monumental task you're just not sure about. You were half right, we do have absolutely no idea how it would go for sure but that goes for Lewis's situation if he was in Alonso's shoes too. Just because it's easy for you to say it so concretely one way but not the other doesn't mean that's how others see it who are trying to look through both eyes. And lets not pretend Lewis hadn't had friction with his teams, he's had more than Alonso (Alo,But and Nico) so I've no idea what that's supposed to mean, neither of them are the poster child for harmony within teams when they feel slighted. You're just again excusing one and not the other.

Agree about that time period but I don't think anyone's holding them up as the only ones that matter, 2007 matters as does every other year if we're talking in a wider who's better discussion of course but when it comes to direct comparisons we have such few between them because of their cars so the times they did have anything near similar paced cars is going to be looked at and those happened to include those years. They should be discussed with full context on both sides though obviously.

Your characterization of Rosberg seems pretty passionate (and completely biased). Hamilton wasn't out-qualified in 2014 because of mistakes. It was because Rosberg intentionally set up his car for a single lap and not the race; hoping that track position would be enough to win the races. Aside from the spin trying for the overcut in Brazil (which basically just cost him a few seconds) name me a significant driving error from Lewis that year? Insulting Rosberg's racecraft while touting Vettel's in a year where Vettel is bottling the championship due to his own racecraft is a bit ironic don't you think? Your comment about Vettel having more pace is 100% baseless. You have no idea how those two match up in terms of raw speed.

As to the hypothetical situation swap; I just want to make sure I'm understanding you. Are you suggesting that you feel Vandoorne (a driver washing out of F1 just two years into his career for lack of performance) would have beaten Hamilton in the same car? How about Alonso vs Stroll? Who do you think would win that? The Vandoorne part was a given Lotus. The Roberg part is a completely different story. Do you think Vandoorne could ahve beaten Michael Schumacher in the same car three years running? Are you trying to equate him with Rosebrg.

And again, the time period you are harping on is NOT one in which they were in comparable situations. It is not more pertinent than any other time period nor does it give you a more meaningful comparison between them. 2007 carries more weight than any other year only because the machinery was not a variable but in 2011-2013 they were in totally different situations and at totally different points in their career. You choose to look that small window of three years because it's literally the only window of time since Hamilton came into the sport where Alonso looks better. The fact is that they've both had had ups and downs in their careers. They've both had brilliant seasons and they've both had some disappointments. The bottom line is that Hamilton has achieved MUCH more success and he beat Alonso when they were teammates.

Anyway, we obviously don't agree. I suppose we could agree on that...


And also accurate but yes I'm salty about Nico, you might've forgot but I like Lewis too. He made some mistakes, certainly more than this year. He had a spin in Hungary as well which he was lucky to get away with. No irony, I pointed out it wasn't a great strength for either imo but I've seen less clumsiness from Seb overall in those situations. No I don't know 100% for a fact, none of us do, it's just my take on it.

No I don't think Vandoorne would beat Lewis and nor did I say so but you said yourself in another thread Lewis lacks when he's either too comfortable or too far away. He certainly can't phone in a performance as we see once he clinches a title, he can't beat a team mate for love nor money it seems. To be clear it's not from Stoff's side any doubt about Lewis matching Alonso's performance comes from but from questions I'd have about Lewis's form,state of mind or whatever if he was marooned at the back watching Seb break the records or Nico surpass his stats. I'm not even convinced he'd stay around in the Sport to watch that, although I think more likely a deal would be done to get him out of there and into the front probably. You just act like it's a given he can do what Alonso has done these past years but it's not for Alonso and I just don't view it as cut and dry as that but you accuse others of doing exactly what you're doing and just assuming Lewis can.

One of the reasons it may feel like I'm harping on is the absurd amount of time I have to spend repeating myself and fighting through all the strawmen. Again, comparable cars not situations. And again, no I don't give it any more weight than other years in isolation but you can bury your head in the sand about that period all you want but I'm not picking them out because Alonso got the better of it, I'm stating the fact it is the only other time period outside of 2007 that they were in anything close to comparable machinery. That's not my problem the results went the way they did but I can't make the 2008/2009 or Turbo era cars any closer to each other in performance through wishful thinking alone, as much as I'd like to for pretty obvious reasons. Or even better an actual dominant car for Alonso to enjoy for a season or two like every other top driver.

No it's not accurate at all Lotus. There's no accuracy in saying that Rosberg has "showed all the race craft of a drunk blind guy". That's called an exaggeration and it's a biased one. Nico was FAR more consistent and handled pressure far better than Vettel. In wheel to wheel combat he may not have been a match for Lewis but he managed to fight him without bottling the car most of the time. Not sure how you can place Vettel's racecraft above Rosberg's considering the sheer amount of spacial awareness-based errors that Vettel makes.

Why do the cars have to be close in performance to compare Lewis and Alonso but the team status and situation don't have to be close? Why do you ignore bad seasons Alonso had like 2004, 2010 and 2015 but insist on including Lewis's worst season of 2011? I think you can still assess a driver's performance in seasons where they don't have a great car. The assessment is very different but I'm not buying your reasoning in the slightest. The results of those three years don't mean any more than the other 9 years where they've both been in F1 together. I'd give Alonso the better 2008, 2011 2013 and 2016. I'd Give Hamilton the better 2007, 2009, 2010, 2014, 2015, 2017 and 2018. I'd say 2012 was pretty much a wash from a driving standpoint but even if you want to give the tie to Alonso that year, I still count more years where Hamilton was better. More importantly, he was better in title fights and better in their head-to-head matchup in the same machinery. He has come through under pressure more often than Alonso and he has simply achieved more. Bench-marking both of them against Button suggests that there is a gap in pace between them at this stage that is larger than in Lewis's rookie year (which makes sense as most drivers get faster from their first year in the sport). That's my thinking. Yours seems to be that 2011-2013 matters most. So we don't see eye to eye.

The comment I made about Lewis in the other thread shows that I am NOT biased. I call it like I see it. You are taking mole hills and trying to make mountains to prop up Alonso. Fernando Alonso is a two time champ and he has had some great underdog seasons where he came close but that doesn't compare to what Lewis is achieving. A few years ago this was a real debate. It's not anymore.

Ask yourself this: if Alonso is really better than Lewis Hamilton; why doesn't anyone want him? Why doesn't Ferrari sign him? Why not Mercedes even? Why not Red Bull or Renault? All of these teams have categorically stated that they didn't consider him when hiring new drivers recently. If he's really so great, the people in F1 would know so a lot better than you or I, wouldn't they? Why are none of the top teams interested? Ferrari are losing the titles these last two years (provided they don't stage a miraculous comeback this year) despite having great cars. All signs point to Hamilton (and how he compares to Vettel) being a major factor in why they are losing. Why not go out and sign Alonso if he's actually even better than Lewis? The Alonso supporters speak with such certainty and arrogance about him seemingly based purely on a couple of scrappy title challenges that fell short. They feel he doesn't actually need to earn that praise through beating anyone. It's just gotten old.



It feels accurate enough when watching the likes of Canada,Spain,Germany and Austria just within his championship year. I'm happy with it. There's a good reason a much slower Red Bull was able to outscore him for so long. Seb is having a mare sure but Nico doesn't have anything on film that's even in the same ballpark as 2011,2015 and 2013 in terms of consistency and impressive performances for me anyway. I didn't even think a Nico-Seb comparison was a debate tbh.


For the love of God, They don't have to be. If you're talking about comparing their overall careers then obviously you include everything. When talking about the times they were in comparable machinery you talk about the comparable machinery years for goodness sake and that includes the context like I already said at least a dozen times now. For as often as I'm having to repeat myself here you still don't seem to grasp that I'm not picking and choosing years to suit anything and nor do I have the ability to make cars from other years closer so that I can include them in any point about comparing them in comparable cars. Funnily enough I can't compare Alonso and Lewis in comparable machinery in 2004 because one of them wasn't even on the damn grid. Yet again the only one doing anything you accuse others of doing is yourself which is quickly becoming your trait on here. I haven't even commented on this thread who I feel has been the better driver overall other than I find it extremely close whatever way I compare and obviously those comparable car years are included and it's a problem for me there was so few. It's not my problem we only had those handful of years in direct competition but obviously that doesn't mean you can't look at both careers in their entirety and decide who you think is better. No-one's saying otherwise.

It might not be a debate for you but it seems to be everywhere else it gets brought up and it certainly still is for me. I tend to flip flop on it and I'm probably always going to. Just this year I think I've gone back and forward twice on it and I'd give Lewis the edge right now I think but I can't pretend the period in direct competition and in those comparable cars didn't happen. And I don't need to prop Alonso up, his career's on film, he's not a driver from the 20's. Everyone can watch every race and know every detail about the cars capabilities and any and all context that goes with it. This isn't a spec series as much as you'd like to pretend it is and his film and stats stands up perfectly well with the machinery he was given.


And to answer the last question I'd go for the same reason RB and Ferrari didn't want Lewis in 2012. Or maybe they think swapping a younger guy for an older one is shortsighted considering Alonso's form the first year in a new team has been iffy three times. He'd be 39 before his second year and they'd get him at his best. Maybe they can't get over being dumped or they fell out along the way. Or maybe they just think they've got better drivers, yeah. Who knows?

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 19, 2018 12:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5024
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
You know if we are going to use Hughes methodology as fact why do I never see Button used as a cross reference were Hamilton beats Alonso hands down?


Probably because it's irrelevant when discussing 2007 I'd imagine so there's no need to do so. If I was making a point of where I felt they are now then obviously I'd take it into consideration when bringing the article up.

I know you've not made a big thing about it but it's just a thing I've noticed that the Hughes article gets brought up about 2007 but the Button comparison never does, don't you think though that it might be relevant when discussing Alonso's Ferrari years to show how high the level of performance that Hamilton had during those years 2010-2012?

These are the years you have been discussing with sandman and without doubt it's much easier to maximise your performance with a subservient teammate than a higher performing Jenson, I'm not a #2 driver, Button.

The model that Alonso had is the one to maximise WDC success, it's the model that Schumacher had and similar to what Vettel has now, also it's the one Hamilton presently has to go all out for the WDC but not one he ever had 2010-2013.


Every time the article is brought up you mention the Button thing so it's not like it's being underrepresented here. Yes I think Lewis was operating at a high level in 2010 and 2012 at least yeah, 2012 was a particularly bad year for JB though it has to be said and like we talked about the last time we discussed the article, the state of the McHonda,JB joining a new team in the Lewis comparison versus Alonso joining a new team would all have to be considered too but it's absolutely relevant,yes. As is the differing team dynamics, absolutely. Along with car performance too, rule set etc..

Nothing should be left out.

It's a 3 year period that includes Hamilton's terrible season of 2011 but his stats are still better than Alonso's, so many caveats how can we come to a defining conclusion?


Well as often pointed out it wasn't pace that Lewis lacked in 2011 so it shouldn't make much of a difference. A defining conclusion on anything in F1 is in pretty short supply so the answer is we probably can't because of all those differences mentioned and others like different engine regulations and in the JB-Alonso one, age.

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 19, 2018 1:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28746
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Probably because it's irrelevant when discussing 2007 I'd imagine so there's no need to do so. If I was making a point of where I felt they are now then obviously I'd take it into consideration when bringing the article up.

I know you've not made a big thing about it but it's just a thing I've noticed that the Hughes article gets brought up about 2007 but the Button comparison never does, don't you think though that it might be relevant when discussing Alonso's Ferrari years to show how high the level of performance that Hamilton had during those years 2010-2012?

These are the years you have been discussing with sandman and without doubt it's much easier to maximise your performance with a subservient teammate than a higher performing Jenson, I'm not a #2 driver, Button.

The model that Alonso had is the one to maximise WDC success, it's the model that Schumacher had and similar to what Vettel has now, also it's the one Hamilton presently has to go all out for the WDC but not one he ever had 2010-2013.


Every time the article is brought up you mention the Button thing so it's not like it's being underrepresented here. Yes I think Lewis was operating at a high level in 2010 and 2012 at least yeah, 2012 was a particularly bad year for JB though it has to be said and like we talked about the last time we discussed the article, the state of the McHonda,JB joining a new team in the Lewis comparison versus Alonso joining a new team would all have to be considered too but it's absolutely relevant,yes. As is the differing team dynamics, absolutely. Along with car performance too, rule set etc..

Nothing should be left out.

It's a 3 year period that includes Hamilton's terrible season of 2011 but his stats are still better than Alonso's, so many caveats how can we come to a defining conclusion?


Well as often pointed out it wasn't pace that Lewis lacked in 2011 so it shouldn't make much of a difference. A defining conclusion on anything in F1 is in pretty short supply so the answer is we probably can't because of all those differences mentioned and others like different engine regulations and in the JB-Alonso one, age.

Yes indeed, anyway I'll leave it at that now, I always respect your posts. :thumbup:

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 2:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5635
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

In the way he isn't making the small mistakes in qualifying and getting out qualified, isn't spinning or making errors during any races and just looks all round at the top of his game. I think generally Seb is quicker and more consistent than Nico, especially in the wet. He's also stronger wheel to wheel though not a big strength of either. Perception is funny yes like how Nico is now held up as some sort of top tier driver instead of the guy even in his championship year that got beat by a McHonda one race, got outscored over a sizeable part of the season by Ricciardo, showed all the race craft of a drunk blind guy with Lewis wheel to wheel on multiple occasions and needed Lewis getting too blasè about finding a workaround on the clutch issue to actually win the title.


I think part of the issue here is your own refusal to accept your own biases, we all have them. You can readily sum up in a line how Lewis would do what Alonso is doing in the McLaren"s no question but the thought of Alonso beating Nico Rosberg in a two horse race is somehow now a monumental task you're just not sure about. You were half right, we do have absolutely no idea how it would go for sure but that goes for Lewis's situation if he was in Alonso's shoes too. Just because it's easy for you to say it so concretely one way but not the other doesn't mean that's how others see it who are trying to look through both eyes. And lets not pretend Lewis hadn't had friction with his teams, he's had more than Alonso (Alo,But and Nico) so I've no idea what that's supposed to mean, neither of them are the poster child for harmony within teams when they feel slighted. You're just again excusing one and not the other.

Agree about that time period but I don't think anyone's holding them up as the only ones that matter, 2007 matters as does every other year if we're talking in a wider who's better discussion of course but when it comes to direct comparisons we have such few between them because of their cars so the times they did have anything near similar paced cars is going to be looked at and those happened to include those years. They should be discussed with full context on both sides though obviously.

Your characterization of Rosberg seems pretty passionate (and completely biased). Hamilton wasn't out-qualified in 2014 because of mistakes. It was because Rosberg intentionally set up his car for a single lap and not the race; hoping that track position would be enough to win the races. Aside from the spin trying for the overcut in Brazil (which basically just cost him a few seconds) name me a significant driving error from Lewis that year? Insulting Rosberg's racecraft while touting Vettel's in a year where Vettel is bottling the championship due to his own racecraft is a bit ironic don't you think? Your comment about Vettel having more pace is 100% baseless. You have no idea how those two match up in terms of raw speed.

As to the hypothetical situation swap; I just want to make sure I'm understanding you. Are you suggesting that you feel Vandoorne (a driver washing out of F1 just two years into his career for lack of performance) would have beaten Hamilton in the same car? How about Alonso vs Stroll? Who do you think would win that? The Vandoorne part was a given Lotus. The Roberg part is a completely different story. Do you think Vandoorne could ahve beaten Michael Schumacher in the same car three years running? Are you trying to equate him with Rosebrg.

And again, the time period you are harping on is NOT one in which they were in comparable situations. It is not more pertinent than any other time period nor does it give you a more meaningful comparison between them. 2007 carries more weight than any other year only because the machinery was not a variable but in 2011-2013 they were in totally different situations and at totally different points in their career. You choose to look that small window of three years because it's literally the only window of time since Hamilton came into the sport where Alonso looks better. The fact is that they've both had had ups and downs in their careers. They've both had brilliant seasons and they've both had some disappointments. The bottom line is that Hamilton has achieved MUCH more success and he beat Alonso when they were teammates.

Anyway, we obviously don't agree. I suppose we could agree on that...


And also accurate but yes I'm salty about Nico, you might've forgot but I like Lewis too. He made some mistakes, certainly more than this year. He had a spin in Hungary as well which he was lucky to get away with. No irony, I pointed out it wasn't a great strength for either imo but I've seen less clumsiness from Seb overall in those situations. No I don't know 100% for a fact, none of us do, it's just my take on it.

No I don't think Vandoorne would beat Lewis and nor did I say so but you said yourself in another thread Lewis lacks when he's either too comfortable or too far away. He certainly can't phone in a performance as we see once he clinches a title, he can't beat a team mate for love nor money it seems. To be clear it's not from Stoff's side any doubt about Lewis matching Alonso's performance comes from but from questions I'd have about Lewis's form,state of mind or whatever if he was marooned at the back watching Seb break the records or Nico surpass his stats. I'm not even convinced he'd stay around in the Sport to watch that, although I think more likely a deal would be done to get him out of there and into the front probably. You just act like it's a given he can do what Alonso has done these past years but it's not for Alonso and I just don't view it as cut and dry as that but you accuse others of doing exactly what you're doing and just assuming Lewis can.

One of the reasons it may feel like I'm harping on is the absurd amount of time I have to spend repeating myself and fighting through all the strawmen. Again, comparable cars not situations. And again, no I don't give it any more weight than other years in isolation but you can bury your head in the sand about that period all you want but I'm not picking them out because Alonso got the better of it, I'm stating the fact it is the only other time period outside of 2007 that they were in anything close to comparable machinery. That's not my problem the results went the way they did but I can't make the 2008/2009 or Turbo era cars any closer to each other in performance through wishful thinking alone, as much as I'd like to for pretty obvious reasons. Or even better an actual dominant car for Alonso to enjoy for a season or two like every other top driver.

No it's not accurate at all Lotus. There's no accuracy in saying that Rosberg has "showed all the race craft of a drunk blind guy". That's called an exaggeration and it's a biased one. Nico was FAR more consistent and handled pressure far better than Vettel. In wheel to wheel combat he may not have been a match for Lewis but he managed to fight him without bottling the car most of the time. Not sure how you can place Vettel's racecraft above Rosberg's considering the sheer amount of spacial awareness-based errors that Vettel makes.

Why do the cars have to be close in performance to compare Lewis and Alonso but the team status and situation don't have to be close? Why do you ignore bad seasons Alonso had like 2004, 2010 and 2015 but insist on including Lewis's worst season of 2011? I think you can still assess a driver's performance in seasons where they don't have a great car. The assessment is very different but I'm not buying your reasoning in the slightest. The results of those three years don't mean any more than the other 9 years where they've both been in F1 together. I'd give Alonso the better 2008, 2011 2013 and 2016. I'd Give Hamilton the better 2007, 2009, 2010, 2014, 2015, 2017 and 2018. I'd say 2012 was pretty much a wash from a driving standpoint but even if you want to give the tie to Alonso that year, I still count more years where Hamilton was better. More importantly, he was better in title fights and better in their head-to-head matchup in the same machinery. He has come through under pressure more often than Alonso and he has simply achieved more. Bench-marking both of them against Button suggests that there is a gap in pace between them at this stage that is larger than in Lewis's rookie year (which makes sense as most drivers get faster from their first year in the sport). That's my thinking. Yours seems to be that 2011-2013 matters most. So we don't see eye to eye.

The comment I made about Lewis in the other thread shows that I am NOT biased. I call it like I see it. You are taking mole hills and trying to make mountains to prop up Alonso. Fernando Alonso is a two time champ and he has had some great underdog seasons where he came close but that doesn't compare to what Lewis is achieving. A few years ago this was a real debate. It's not anymore.

Ask yourself this: if Alonso is really better than Lewis Hamilton; why doesn't anyone want him? Why doesn't Ferrari sign him? Why not Mercedes even? Why not Red Bull or Renault? All of these teams have categorically stated that they didn't consider him when hiring new drivers recently. If he's really so great, the people in F1 would know so a lot better than you or I, wouldn't they? Why are none of the top teams interested? Ferrari are losing the titles these last two years (provided they don't stage a miraculous comeback this year) despite having great cars. All signs point to Hamilton (and how he compares to Vettel) being a major factor in why they are losing. Why not go out and sign Alonso if he's actually even better than Lewis? The Alonso supporters speak with such certainty and arrogance about him seemingly based purely on a couple of scrappy title challenges that fell short. They feel he doesn't actually need to earn that praise through beating anyone. It's just gotten old.



It feels accurate enough when watching the likes of Canada,Spain,Germany and Austria just within his championship year. I'm happy with it. There's a good reason a much slower Red Bull was able to outscore him for so long. Seb is having a mare sure but Nico doesn't have anything on film that's even in the same ballpark as 2011,2015 and 2013 in terms of consistency and impressive performances for me anyway. I didn't even think a Nico-Seb comparison was a debate tbh.


For the love of God, They don't have to be. If you're talking about comparing their overall careers then obviously you include everything. When talking about the times they were in comparable machinery you talk about the comparable machinery years for goodness sake and that includes the context like I already said at least a dozen times now. For as often as I'm having to repeat myself here you still don't seem to grasp that I'm not picking and choosing years to suit anything and nor do I have the ability to make cars from other years closer so that I can include them in any point about comparing them in comparable cars. Funnily enough I can't compare Alonso and Lewis in comparable machinery in 2004 because one of them wasn't even on the damn grid. Yet again the only one doing anything you accuse others of doing is yourself which is quickly becoming your trait on here. I haven't even commented on this thread who I feel has been the better driver overall other than I find it extremely close whatever way I compare and obviously those comparable car years are included and it's a problem for me there was so few. It's not my problem we only had those handful of years in direct competition but obviously that doesn't mean you can't look at both careers in their entirety and decide who you think is better. No-one's saying otherwise.

It might not be a debate for you but it seems to be everywhere else it gets brought up and it certainly still is for me. I tend to flip flop on it and I'm probably always going to. Just this year I think I've gone back and forward twice on it and I'd give Lewis the edge right now I think but I can't pretend the period in direct competition and in those comparable cars didn't happen. And I don't need to prop Alonso up, his career's on film, he's not a driver from the 20's. Everyone can watch every race and know every detail about the cars capabilities and any and all context that goes with it. This isn't a spec series as much as you'd like to pretend it is and his film and stats stands up perfectly well with the machinery he was given.


And to answer the last question I'd go for the same reason RB and Ferrari didn't want Lewis in 2012. Or maybe they think swapping a younger guy for an older one is shortsighted considering Alonso's form the first year in a new team has been iffy three times. He'd be 39 before his second year and they'd get him at his best. Maybe they can't get over being dumped or they fell out along the way. Or maybe they just think they've got better drivers, yeah. Who knows?

For me, Vettel and Rosberg are absolutely the same caliber. You want to nitpick at Robserg's bad races in 2016 but neglect to mention his domination of Michael Schumacher as a teammate and his ability to run Lewis closer in qualifying than any other teammate he's had in his career. You also neglect to point out Vettel's Baku, France, Germany and Italy this year or the plethora of mistakes he made in years like 2009, 2010, 2014 and 2016. Very selective.

I'm not asking you to pretend anything. I'm trying (and apparently failing) to point out that the years you feel have additional poignancy, do not. If you want to focus on the machinery alone and the level of performance, then you would simply focus on the performance level between Hamilton and Alonso. During that window of time, Hamilton won more races, set more pole positions and was generally quicker than Alonso. That's not what you're focusing on though. You're focusing on the points. As such you are not choosing a time when their situations make for a good comparison.

What if, instead of signing Leclerc, Ferrari signed Alonso to replace Raikkonen and team up with Vettel next year? Let's also say that they insist on 100% equal status; whoever is in the lead gets first pit stop choice, no moving one driver out of the other driver's way, etc. Let's also say that Mercedes strips Valteri of his right to his own race and relegates him to full-on #2 status; where Lewis has complete control of Valteri's race and the ability to use Bottas as a chess piece for his strategy. Lastly, let's say that Ferrari has much worse reliability than Mercedes that year as well as worse strategy/team performance. Would looking at the points table tell you who was the better driver between Hamilton and Alonso?

As far as whether it's a debate or not; I assumed it was implicit that this was my opinion. Look at the results for the poll in this thread and you'll see that some still perceive a debate between Hamilton and Vettel. There are some people who will literally debate you on whether the Earth is round or flat. Our species comes to a 100% consensus on absolutely nothing. My comment was to indicate that I feel Alonso's case has weakened to the point where things are now lopsided. It's not really through any major fault of his own. Mostly it's through Lewis just wracking up feats that Alonso cannot match.

As for the last bit; I don't recall Lewis ever linked with Ferrari on any level back in 2012. The Red Bull thing was from 2011 when both he and Alonso wanted to go there but RBR stood pat (probably because they were winning everything and didn't want to rock the boat). So let's forget Mercedes signing Fernando then but what about the other teams? Why no offers? Are you really comparing Alonso's situation today with Lewis's situation in 2012? Hamilton could have signed for a lot of teams that year (including a competitive Mclaren). He ended up going to the team with the biggest budget in F1 and the team that has dominated the sport ever since shortly after his arrival. You think that's comparable to Alonso getting the cold shoulder from every team other than that same McLaren team that hasn't won a race since Lewis left? I think we're just in two different worlds on this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 3:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5024
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I know you've not made a big thing about it but it's just a thing I've noticed that the Hughes article gets brought up about 2007 but the Button comparison never does, don't you think though that it might be relevant when discussing Alonso's Ferrari years to show how high the level of performance that Hamilton had during those years 2010-2012?

These are the years you have been discussing with sandman and without doubt it's much easier to maximise your performance with a subservient teammate than a higher performing Jenson, I'm not a #2 driver, Button.

The model that Alonso had is the one to maximise WDC success, it's the model that Schumacher had and similar to what Vettel has now, also it's the one Hamilton presently has to go all out for the WDC but not one he ever had 2010-2013.


Every time the article is brought up you mention the Button thing so it's not like it's being underrepresented here. Yes I think Lewis was operating at a high level in 2010 and 2012 at least yeah, 2012 was a particularly bad year for JB though it has to be said and like we talked about the last time we discussed the article, the state of the McHonda,JB joining a new team in the Lewis comparison versus Alonso joining a new team would all have to be considered too but it's absolutely relevant,yes. As is the differing team dynamics, absolutely. Along with car performance too, rule set etc..

Nothing should be left out.

It's a 3 year period that includes Hamilton's terrible season of 2011 but his stats are still better than Alonso's, so many caveats how can we come to a defining conclusion?


Well as often pointed out it wasn't pace that Lewis lacked in 2011 so it shouldn't make much of a difference. A defining conclusion on anything in F1 is in pretty short supply so the answer is we probably can't because of all those differences mentioned and others like different engine regulations and in the JB-Alonso one, age.

Yes indeed, anyway I'll leave it at that now, I always respect your posts. :thumbup:


Cheers, ditto. :thumbup:

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 19, 2018 4:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5024
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Your characterization of Rosberg seems pretty passionate (and completely biased). Hamilton wasn't out-qualified in 2014 because of mistakes. It was because Rosberg intentionally set up his car for a single lap and not the race; hoping that track position would be enough to win the races. Aside from the spin trying for the overcut in Brazil (which basically just cost him a few seconds) name me a significant driving error from Lewis that year? Insulting Rosberg's racecraft while touting Vettel's in a year where Vettel is bottling the championship due to his own racecraft is a bit ironic don't you think? Your comment about Vettel having more pace is 100% baseless. You have no idea how those two match up in terms of raw speed.

As to the hypothetical situation swap; I just want to make sure I'm understanding you. Are you suggesting that you feel Vandoorne (a driver washing out of F1 just two years into his career for lack of performance) would have beaten Hamilton in the same car? How about Alonso vs Stroll? Who do you think would win that? The Vandoorne part was a given Lotus. The Roberg part is a completely different story. Do you think Vandoorne could ahve beaten Michael Schumacher in the same car three years running? Are you trying to equate him with Rosebrg.

And again, the time period you are harping on is NOT one in which they were in comparable situations. It is not more pertinent than any other time period nor does it give you a more meaningful comparison between them. 2007 carries more weight than any other year only because the machinery was not a variable but in 2011-2013 they were in totally different situations and at totally different points in their career. You choose to look that small window of three years because it's literally the only window of time since Hamilton came into the sport where Alonso looks better. The fact is that they've both had had ups and downs in their careers. They've both had brilliant seasons and they've both had some disappointments. The bottom line is that Hamilton has achieved MUCH more success and he beat Alonso when they were teammates.

Anyway, we obviously don't agree. I suppose we could agree on that...


And also accurate but yes I'm salty about Nico, you might've forgot but I like Lewis too. He made some mistakes, certainly more than this year. He had a spin in Hungary as well which he was lucky to get away with. No irony, I pointed out it wasn't a great strength for either imo but I've seen less clumsiness from Seb overall in those situations. No I don't know 100% for a fact, none of us do, it's just my take on it.

No I don't think Vandoorne would beat Lewis and nor did I say so but you said yourself in another thread Lewis lacks when he's either too comfortable or too far away. He certainly can't phone in a performance as we see once he clinches a title, he can't beat a team mate for love nor money it seems. To be clear it's not from Stoff's side any doubt about Lewis matching Alonso's performance comes from but from questions I'd have about Lewis's form,state of mind or whatever if he was marooned at the back watching Seb break the records or Nico surpass his stats. I'm not even convinced he'd stay around in the Sport to watch that, although I think more likely a deal would be done to get him out of there and into the front probably. You just act like it's a given he can do what Alonso has done these past years but it's not for Alonso and I just don't view it as cut and dry as that but you accuse others of doing exactly what you're doing and just assuming Lewis can.

One of the reasons it may feel like I'm harping on is the absurd amount of time I have to spend repeating myself and fighting through all the strawmen. Again, comparable cars not situations. And again, no I don't give it any more weight than other years in isolation but you can bury your head in the sand about that period all you want but I'm not picking them out because Alonso got the better of it, I'm stating the fact it is the only other time period outside of 2007 that they were in anything close to comparable machinery. That's not my problem the results went the way they did but I can't make the 2008/2009 or Turbo era cars any closer to each other in performance through wishful thinking alone, as much as I'd like to for pretty obvious reasons. Or even better an actual dominant car for Alonso to enjoy for a season or two like every other top driver.

No it's not accurate at all Lotus. There's no accuracy in saying that Rosberg has "showed all the race craft of a drunk blind guy". That's called an exaggeration and it's a biased one. Nico was FAR more consistent and handled pressure far better than Vettel. In wheel to wheel combat he may not have been a match for Lewis but he managed to fight him without bottling the car most of the time. Not sure how you can place Vettel's racecraft above Rosberg's considering the sheer amount of spacial awareness-based errors that Vettel makes.

Why do the cars have to be close in performance to compare Lewis and Alonso but the team status and situation don't have to be close? Why do you ignore bad seasons Alonso had like 2004, 2010 and 2015 but insist on including Lewis's worst season of 2011? I think you can still assess a driver's performance in seasons where they don't have a great car. The assessment is very different but I'm not buying your reasoning in the slightest. The results of those three years don't mean any more than the other 9 years where they've both been in F1 together. I'd give Alonso the better 2008, 2011 2013 and 2016. I'd Give Hamilton the better 2007, 2009, 2010, 2014, 2015, 2017 and 2018. I'd say 2012 was pretty much a wash from a driving standpoint but even if you want to give the tie to Alonso that year, I still count more years where Hamilton was better. More importantly, he was better in title fights and better in their head-to-head matchup in the same machinery. He has come through under pressure more often than Alonso and he has simply achieved more. Bench-marking both of them against Button suggests that there is a gap in pace between them at this stage that is larger than in Lewis's rookie year (which makes sense as most drivers get faster from their first year in the sport). That's my thinking. Yours seems to be that 2011-2013 matters most. So we don't see eye to eye.

The comment I made about Lewis in the other thread shows that I am NOT biased. I call it like I see it. You are taking mole hills and trying to make mountains to prop up Alonso. Fernando Alonso is a two time champ and he has had some great underdog seasons where he came close but that doesn't compare to what Lewis is achieving. A few years ago this was a real debate. It's not anymore.

Ask yourself this: if Alonso is really better than Lewis Hamilton; why doesn't anyone want him? Why doesn't Ferrari sign him? Why not Mercedes even? Why not Red Bull or Renault? All of these teams have categorically stated that they didn't consider him when hiring new drivers recently. If he's really so great, the people in F1 would know so a lot better than you or I, wouldn't they? Why are none of the top teams interested? Ferrari are losing the titles these last two years (provided they don't stage a miraculous comeback this year) despite having great cars. All signs point to Hamilton (and how he compares to Vettel) being a major factor in why they are losing. Why not go out and sign Alonso if he's actually even better than Lewis? The Alonso supporters speak with such certainty and arrogance about him seemingly based purely on a couple of scrappy title challenges that fell short. They feel he doesn't actually need to earn that praise through beating anyone. It's just gotten old.



It feels accurate enough when watching the likes of Canada,Spain,Germany and Austria just within his championship year. I'm happy with it. There's a good reason a much slower Red Bull was able to outscore him for so long. Seb is having a mare sure but Nico doesn't have anything on film that's even in the same ballpark as 2011,2015 and 2013 in terms of consistency and impressive performances for me anyway. I didn't even think a Nico-Seb comparison was a debate tbh.


For the love of God, They don't have to be. If you're talking about comparing their overall careers then obviously you include everything. When talking about the times they were in comparable machinery you talk about the comparable machinery years for goodness sake and that includes the context like I already said at least a dozen times now. For as often as I'm having to repeat myself here you still don't seem to grasp that I'm not picking and choosing years to suit anything and nor do I have the ability to make cars from other years closer so that I can include them in any point about comparing them in comparable cars. Funnily enough I can't compare Alonso and Lewis in comparable machinery in 2004 because one of them wasn't even on the damn grid. Yet again the only one doing anything you accuse others of doing is yourself which is quickly becoming your trait on here. I haven't even commented on this thread who I feel has been the better driver overall other than I find it extremely close whatever way I compare and obviously those comparable car years are included and it's a problem for me there was so few. It's not my problem we only had those handful of years in direct competition but obviously that doesn't mean you can't look at both careers in their entirety and decide who you think is better. No-one's saying otherwise.

It might not be a debate for you but it seems to be everywhere else it gets brought up and it certainly still is for me. I tend to flip flop on it and I'm probably always going to. Just this year I think I've gone back and forward twice on it and I'd give Lewis the edge right now I think but I can't pretend the period in direct competition and in those comparable cars didn't happen. And I don't need to prop Alonso up, his career's on film, he's not a driver from the 20's. Everyone can watch every race and know every detail about the cars capabilities and any and all context that goes with it. This isn't a spec series as much as you'd like to pretend it is and his film and stats stands up perfectly well with the machinery he was given.


And to answer the last question I'd go for the same reason RB and Ferrari didn't want Lewis in 2012. Or maybe they think swapping a younger guy for an older one is shortsighted considering Alonso's form the first year in a new team has been iffy three times. He'd be 39 before his second year and they'd get him at his best. Maybe they can't get over being dumped or they fell out along the way. Or maybe they just think they've got better drivers, yeah. Who knows?

For me, Vettel and Rosberg are absolutely the same caliber. You want to nitpick at Robserg's bad races in 2016 but neglect to mention his domination of Michael Schumacher as a teammate and his ability to run Lewis closer in qualifying than any other teammate he's had in his career. You also neglect to point out Vettel's Baku, France, Germany and Italy this year or the plethora of mistakes he made in years like 2009, 2010, 2014 and 2016. Very selective.

I'm not asking you to pretend anything. I'm trying (and apparently failing) to point out that the years you feel have additional poignancy, do not. If you want to focus on the machinery alone and the level of performance, then you would simply focus on the performance level between Hamilton and Alonso. During that window of time, Hamilton won more races, set more pole positions and was generally quicker than Alonso. That's not what you're focusing on though. You're focusing on the points. As such you are not choosing a time when their situations make for a good comparison.

What if, instead of signing Leclerc, Ferrari signed Alonso to replace Raikkonen and team up with Vettel next year? Let's also say that they insist on 100% equal status; whoever is in the lead gets first pit stop choice, no moving one driver out of the other driver's way, etc. Let's also say that Mercedes strips Valteri of his right to his own race and relegates him to full-on #2 status; where Lewis has complete control of Valteri's race and the ability to use Bottas as a chess piece for his strategy. Lastly, let's say that Ferrari has much worse reliability than Mercedes that year as well as worse strategy/team performance. Would looking at the points table tell you who was the better driver between Hamilton and Alonso?

As far as whether it's a debate or not; I assumed it was implicit that this was my opinion. Look at the results for the poll in this thread and you'll see that some still perceive a debate between Hamilton and Vettel. There are some people who will literally debate you on whether the Earth is round or flat. Our species comes to a 100% consensus on absolutely nothing. My comment was to indicate that I feel Alonso's case has weakened to the point where things are now lopsided. It's not really through any major fault of his own. Mostly it's through Lewis just wracking up feats that Alonso cannot match.

As for the last bit; I don't recall Lewis ever linked with Ferrari on any level back in 2012. The Red Bull thing was from 2011 when both he and Alonso wanted to go there but RBR stood pat (probably because they were winning everything and didn't want to rock the boat). So let's forget Mercedes signing Fernando then but what about the other teams? Why no offers? Are you really comparing Alonso's situation today with Lewis's situation in 2012? Hamilton could have signed for a lot of teams that year (including a competitive Mclaren). He ended up going to the team with the biggest budget in F1 and the team that has dominated the sport ever since shortly after his arrival. You think that's comparable to Alonso getting the cold shoulder from every team other than that same McLaren team that hasn't won a race since Lewis left? I think we're just in two different worlds on this.


I neglected to mention lots of things from the career of both drivers as I'd be here all day but you obviously put more weight into beating a 40-43yr old Schumacher who's been out of the sport for 3 years than I do. And I believe Alonso was closer to Lewis than Rosberg was in qualifying. I think Seb's performances more than stand up to Nico, even with an inferior car in 2015 he was still fighting with him late in the season such was Nico's own form, it's not like 2016 was the odd one out in Nico's career, it was even considered a good one. Is this or the other years mentioned considered good ones for Seb?

And you're at it again. I've mentioned more than the points every single time. I specifically said I had it 3-2 rather than the 4-1 that it was on the WDC table for those 5 seasons because I felt Lewis performed better in 2010 so I've no idea what you're rabbiting on about. There's only so many times I can keep saying the same thing and to be frank how much poignancy you put into it doesn't concern me. We clearly look at things very differently in this Sport.


You're obviously entitled to that opinion and I obviously disagree on that one.


We appear in two different worlds because you insist on using strawmen every two seconds to twist my words and apply them to situations or statements I'm not making instead of just taking them as read. Even when I reiterate it does nothing but the point about 2012 (or whenever the RB thing was) was just the not wanting two roosters/rock the boat thing, yeah. I (wrongly) assumed you'd understand what I meant and wouldn't read 58 different things into it and go off on one again with more random strawman questions. Lesson learned. (The Ferrari mention was just the rumour about Alonso not wanting him so he blocked it but it was just a rumour to be fair)

_________________
"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: Thu Sep 20, 2018 11:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2063
Laz_T800 wrote:
Not sure why Alonso's been brought into this debate, but here goes.

Alonso is one of the top drivers of the last 17 years but will never be above Lewis IMHO.
Lewis more than held his own when they were teammates, as a rookie no less.
Alonso gets far too much credit for beating a bunch of journeymen teammates over the years.
In the crunch situations he's been found wanting, Lewis has risen when under pressure and delivered time and again.


I am with you that Hamilton is marginally ahead of Alonso (I do think it is a close call). What I find a bit over the top is your comment about Alonso just beating some journeyman drivers as teammates. Two of these "journeyman" drivers were viewed to be amongst the absoute best by many before they got teamed with Alonso - and comprehensively beaten by him.

I agree that both Hamilton and Alonso are clearly better than Vettel - and I always said so.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 11:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28746
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Not sure why Alonso's been brought into this debate, but here goes.

Alonso is one of the top drivers of the last 17 years but will never be above Lewis IMHO.
Lewis more than held his own when they were teammates, as a rookie no less.
Alonso gets far too much credit for beating a bunch of journeymen teammates over the years.
In the crunch situations he's been found wanting, Lewis has risen when under pressure and delivered time and again.


I am with you that Hamilton is marginally ahead of Alonso (I do think it is a close call). What I find a bit over the top is your comment about Alonso just beating some journeyman drivers as teammates. Two of these "journeyman" drivers were viewed to be amongst the absoute best by many before they got teamed with Alonso - and comprehensively beaten by him.

I agree that both Hamilton and Alonso are clearly better than Vettel - and I always said so.

The drivers then got beat by other drivers which confirmed them as being no better than tier 2 drivers, to call them journeyman drivers however is unfair.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5635
@Lotus49
Instead of going back and forth indefinitely, I'll just accept the fact that we do not agree.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
Posts: 706
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Not sure why Alonso's been brought into this debate, but here goes.

Alonso is one of the top drivers of the last 17 years but will never be above Lewis IMHO.
Lewis more than held his own when they were teammates, as a rookie no less.
Alonso gets far too much credit for beating a bunch of journeymen teammates over the years.
In the crunch situations he's been found wanting, Lewis has risen when under pressure and delivered time and again.


I am with you that Hamilton is marginally ahead of Alonso (I do think it is a close call). What I find a bit over the top is your comment about Alonso just beating some journeyman drivers as teammates. Two of these "journeyman" drivers were viewed to be amongst the absoute best by many before they got teamed with Alonso - and comprehensively beaten by him.

I agree that both Hamilton and Alonso are clearly better than Vettel - and I always said so.


I guess you mean Kimi and Jenson.
Granted, they had some good seasons earlier in their careers but were far from at their peak when paired with Fernando.

He blew Massa away but who hasn't?
Grosjean? He's improved since those days but still isn't highly thought of.
Piquet Jr? Nothing needs adding.
Fisichella? Got beat by a rookie Kovalainen and the less said about his Ferrari days the better.
Vandoorne? Fast approaching the F1 exit door due to his massive under performance.

When you really are just being judged by how much you are beating your team mate, you need to be beating better than this lot to make me believe your better than the 4 x WDC who matched you as a rookie.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
Posts: 706
pokerman wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Not sure why Alonso's been brought into this debate, but here goes.

Alonso is one of the top drivers of the last 17 years but will never be above Lewis IMHO.
Lewis more than held his own when they were teammates, as a rookie no less.
Alonso gets far too much credit for beating a bunch of journeymen teammates over the years.
In the crunch situations he's been found wanting, Lewis has risen when under pressure and delivered time and again.


I am with you that Hamilton is marginally ahead of Alonso (I do think it is a close call). What I find a bit over the top is your comment about Alonso just beating some journeyman drivers as teammates. Two of these "journeyman" drivers were viewed to be amongst the absoute best by many before they got teamed with Alonso - and comprehensively beaten by him.

I agree that both Hamilton and Alonso are clearly better than Vettel - and I always said so.

The drivers then got beat by other drivers which confirmed them as being no better than tier 2 drivers, to call them journeyman drivers however is unfair.


I withdraw Kimi and Jenson from the journeymen accusation.

The others are staying firmly in that bracket though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28746
Laz_T800 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Not sure why Alonso's been brought into this debate, but here goes.

Alonso is one of the top drivers of the last 17 years but will never be above Lewis IMHO.
Lewis more than held his own when they were teammates, as a rookie no less.
Alonso gets far too much credit for beating a bunch of journeymen teammates over the years.
In the crunch situations he's been found wanting, Lewis has risen when under pressure and delivered time and again.


I am with you that Hamilton is marginally ahead of Alonso (I do think it is a close call). What I find a bit over the top is your comment about Alonso just beating some journeyman drivers as teammates. Two of these "journeyman" drivers were viewed to be amongst the absoute best by many before they got teamed with Alonso - and comprehensively beaten by him.

I agree that both Hamilton and Alonso are clearly better than Vettel - and I always said so.

The drivers then got beat by other drivers which confirmed them as being no better than tier 2 drivers, to call them journeyman drivers however is unfair.


I withdraw Kimi and Jenson from the journeymen accusation.

The others are staying firmly in that bracket though.

Well I wasn't putting Button in that list, he's one driver that Alonso didn't exactly steamroll.

I'm actually agreeing with you for the most apart, except the journeyman labels.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2063
Laz_T800 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Not sure why Alonso's been brought into this debate, but here goes.

Alonso is one of the top drivers of the last 17 years but will never be above Lewis IMHO.
Lewis more than held his own when they were teammates, as a rookie no less.
Alonso gets far too much credit for beating a bunch of journeymen teammates over the years.
In the crunch situations he's been found wanting, Lewis has risen when under pressure and delivered time and again.


I am with you that Hamilton is marginally ahead of Alonso (I do think it is a close call). What I find a bit over the top is your comment about Alonso just beating some journeyman drivers as teammates. Two of these "journeyman" drivers were viewed to be amongst the absoute best by many before they got teamed with Alonso - and comprehensively beaten by him.

I agree that both Hamilton and Alonso are clearly better than Vettel - and I always said so.

The drivers then got beat by other drivers which confirmed them as being no better than tier 2 drivers, to call them journeyman drivers however is unfair.


I withdraw Kimi and Jenson from the journeymen accusation.

The others are staying firmly in that bracket though.


Well, Massa and Räikkönen were very similar performance-wise when they were teammates ....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5635
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Not sure why Alonso's been brought into this debate, but here goes.

Alonso is one of the top drivers of the last 17 years but will never be above Lewis IMHO.
Lewis more than held his own when they were teammates, as a rookie no less.
Alonso gets far too much credit for beating a bunch of journeymen teammates over the years.
In the crunch situations he's been found wanting, Lewis has risen when under pressure and delivered time and again.


I am with you that Hamilton is marginally ahead of Alonso (I do think it is a close call). What I find a bit over the top is your comment about Alonso just beating some journeyman drivers as teammates. Two of these "journeyman" drivers were viewed to be amongst the absoute best by many before they got teamed with Alonso - and comprehensively beaten by him.

I agree that both Hamilton and Alonso are clearly better than Vettel - and I always said so.

The drivers then got beat by other drivers which confirmed them as being no better than tier 2 drivers, to call them journeyman drivers however is unfair.


I withdraw Kimi and Jenson from the journeymen accusation.

The others are staying firmly in that bracket though.


Well, Massa and Räikkönen were very similar performance-wise when they were teammates ....

"Similar" is being generous to Kimi. The one area where Kimi was superior was popularity. Honestly I just think Kimi will forever be overrated.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2063
Laz_T800 wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
Laz_T800 wrote:
Not sure why Alonso's been brought into this debate, but here goes.

Alonso is one of the top drivers of the last 17 years but will never be above Lewis IMHO.
Lewis more than held his own when they were teammates, as a rookie no less.
Alonso gets far too much credit for beating a bunch of journeymen teammates over the years.
In the crunch situations he's been found wanting, Lewis has risen when under pressure and delivered time and again.


I am with you that Hamilton is marginally ahead of Alonso (I do think it is a close call). What I find a bit over the top is your comment about Alonso just beating some journeyman drivers as teammates. Two of these "journeyman" drivers were viewed to be amongst the absoute best by many before they got teamed with Alonso - and comprehensively beaten by him.

I agree that both Hamilton and Alonso are clearly better than Vettel - and I always said so.


I guess you mean Kimi and Jenson.
Granted, they had some good seasons earlier in their careers but were far from at their peak when paired with Fernando.

He blew Massa away but who hasn't?
Grosjean? He's improved since those days but still isn't highly thought of.
Piquet Jr? Nothing needs adding.
Fisichella? Got beat by a rookie Kovalainen and the less said about his Ferrari days the better.
Vandoorne? Fast approaching the F1 exit door due to his massive under performance.

When you really are just being judged by how much you are beating your team mate, you need to be beating better than this lot to make me believe your better than the 4 x WDC who matched you as a rookie.


You did read that I rate Hamilton ahead of Alonso? So, what for the last sentence? Or do you disagree with the marginally?

You take a lot of effort to downwrite Alonso's teammates, a very one-sided effort. Two were wdc's, one a multple race winner and vice-wdc and several others highly regarded. So, either they were all overrated before teamed with Alonso, or there is some merit in Alonso beating them. I think the latter is by far more probable and plausible.

You write that for a better rating a driver must beat better teammates than this lot. Who - except of Alain Prost - has beaten a lot of teammates with a better pedigree?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:02 am
Posts: 846
Location: India
Vettel is as good if not better than Hamilton. Vettel is in more pressure and has made mistake is the only difference. Hamilton is just in better form than in early part of the year and Mercedes seems to have better package than Ferrari. If I were to compare these two with Alonso. I think both of them are much faster. MV is also in great from after the mistakes he made earlier in the season. I do not think there is much difference between top6 drivers so it is pointless to compare them. It all comes down to form, car performance etc ..

sandman1347 wrote:
"Similar" is being generous to Kimi. The one area where Kimi was superior was popularity. Honestly I just think Kimi will forever be overrated.


Kimi almost won the title with 3rd best car in 2003. He was 2pts behind MS and in 2005 he was unlucky not win the title again. Kimi unlike some other driver like Alonso is not interested in team politics. Though he was left stranded when they changed the car to suit Massa when he won 2 of the first 4 races in 2008 :uhoh: If I remember correctly he had more DNF in 2007 but won most races than anyone else.

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


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: Bing [Bot], Blake 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