planetf1.com

It is currently Sat Nov 17, 2018 6:17 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 4:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 11:52 am
Posts: 164
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferrari-never-dominant-car-vettel/3207115/

So I've just read the above article (sorry Planet F1 - I still read your articles!)...and couldn't help but think Vettel has shot himself in the foot.

He's done this because he is partly right in what he is saying. Where he is partly wrong is that Ferrari DID have a dominant car in certain races - Bahrain, Montreal, China, Baku...but where he is partly right is that they only had A STRONG CAR for most of the season just like Mercedes had a strong/dominant and weak car from race to race too.

Thing is, Hamilton clearly made the difference because if we agree that both Ferrari and Mercedes had a equally dominant/strong car for the season then what Vettel is essentially saying is that he couldn't make the difference, whereas Hamilton could - hence shooting himself in the foot.

See what I'm saying forum peeps? Or am I being too tabloidy and making an unjust opinion on the matter?

_________________
F1 Fan: 26 years and counting...
Grand Prixs Attended:
British x3 * Hungary * Italy * USA * Spain * Belgium


Grand Prixs on bucket list...
Canada * Mexico * Japan * Germany *


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 5:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14223
I think good on him for having the balls to be honest about the situation. I really like Vettel out of the car. Honestly think he's a decent bloke.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 5:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7521
The only races I would describe as dominant off the top of my head are Australia, China, Spain, France and Singapore. So 4-1 to Merc.

When Mercedes have got it right this season they've been untouchable quite often actually. Ferrari have been better but they've not had a dominant advantage as often as Mercedes have, which I think is the gist of what Vettel is saying here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 5:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3076
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
The only races I would describe as dominant off the top of my head are Australia, China, Spain, France and Singapore. So 4-1 to Merc.

When Mercedes have got it right this season they've been untouchable quite often actually. Ferrari have been better but they've not had a dominant advantage as often as Mercedes have, which I think is the gist of what Vettel is saying here.


Ferrari had a big advantage over Mercedes in Mexico.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 6:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7521
F1_Ernie wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
The only races I would describe as dominant off the top of my head are Australia, China, Spain, France and Singapore. So 4-1 to Merc.

When Mercedes have got it right this season they've been untouchable quite often actually. Ferrari have been better but they've not had a dominant advantage as often as Mercedes have, which I think is the gist of what Vettel is saying here.


Ferrari had a big advantage over Mercedes in Mexico.

In the race yes but that seemed more due to tyre wear, in qualifying they seemed more or less equal with maybe a slight edge to Mercedes. Ferrari clearly the better car that weekend but I wouldn't call it dominance.

I pretty much define dominance as when they look untouchable in terms of pure pace all weekend.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 6:53 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6093
Location: Michigan, USA
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
The only races I would describe as dominant off the top of my head are Australia, China, Spain, France and Singapore. So 4-1 to Merc.

When Mercedes have got it right this season they've been untouchable quite often actually. Ferrari have been better but they've not had a dominant advantage as often as Mercedes have, which I think is the gist of what Vettel is saying here.

This is something I actually noticed myself earlier in the season. Ferrari has been ahead more often, but when Merc is ahead they're often ahead by more than when Ferrari is ahead.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 6:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3076
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
The only races I would describe as dominant off the top of my head are Australia, China, Spain, France and Singapore. So 4-1 to Merc.

When Mercedes have got it right this season they've been untouchable quite often actually. Ferrari have been better but they've not had a dominant advantage as often as Mercedes have, which I think is the gist of what Vettel is saying here.


Ferrari had a big advantage over Mercedes in Mexico.

In the race yes but that seemed more due to tyre wear, in qualifying they seemed more or less equal with maybe a slight edge to Mercedes. Ferrari clearly the better car that weekend but I wouldn't call it dominance.

I pretty much define dominance as when they look untouchable in terms of pure pace all weekend.


I would say a car which finishes 61 seconds in front of another has quite a significant advantage, Kimi was even 30 seconds ahead. I would rather say significant advantage because I don't see any of the races this season as dominant, dominant is more like 2014-16. Amus rated the Ferrari as the number 1 car even ahead of the Red bull.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:07 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6093
Location: Michigan, USA
F1_Ernie wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
The only races I would describe as dominant off the top of my head are Australia, China, Spain, France and Singapore. So 4-1 to Merc.

When Mercedes have got it right this season they've been untouchable quite often actually. Ferrari have been better but they've not had a dominant advantage as often as Mercedes have, which I think is the gist of what Vettel is saying here.


Ferrari had a big advantage over Mercedes in Mexico.

In the race yes but that seemed more due to tyre wear, in qualifying they seemed more or less equal with maybe a slight edge to Mercedes. Ferrari clearly the better car that weekend but I wouldn't call it dominance.

I pretty much define dominance as when they look untouchable in terms of pure pace all weekend.

I would say a car which finishes 61 seconds in front of another has quite a significant advantage, Kimi was even 30 seconds ahead. I would rather say significant advantage because I don't see any of the races this season as dominant, dominant is more like 2014-16. Amus rated the Ferrari as the number 1 car even ahead of the Red bull.

I don't see how you can say they were better than Red Bull, but dominant over Mercedes, yes. Purely because of tyres, however.

It's interesting/ironic that for 3 out of RBR's 4 wins, Ferrari had a sizable advantage over Mercedes but couldn't reap the full benefit due to a Bull taking the victory. The only exception is Austria, where Mercedes had a huge advantage but lost it due to reliability (and blown strategy if not reliability).

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3207
The term "dominant car" is misleading the whole discussion. Clearly, the Ferrari was never at any point at the level of Mercedes in 2014-2016. However, in modern Formula 1, that level of dominance isn't needed to control the race, so long as you have an edge, you can pull out the gap - sit 5 seconds in front of the guy behind and protect yourself against the undercut. The only advantage that a "dominant" car has over a car with an edge, is when it comes to races with unexpected events - sudden rain, unfortunately timed safety car wiping out your lead. In races where this doesn't happen (which is the majority) then 0.4 seconds a lap is as a good as one with 4 seconds a lap to get the job done.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:04 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6093
Location: Michigan, USA
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
The term "dominant car" is misleading the whole discussion. Clearly, the Ferrari was never at any point at the level of Mercedes in 2014-2016. However, in modern Formula 1, that level of dominance isn't needed to control the race, so long as you have an edge, you can pull out the gap - sit 5 seconds in front of the guy behind and protect yourself against the undercut. The only advantage that a "dominant" car has over a car with an edge, is when it comes to races with unexpected events - sudden rain, unfortunately timed safety car wiping out your lead. In races where this doesn't happen (which is the majority) then 0.4 seconds a lap is as a good as one with 4 seconds a lap to get the job done.

0.4 seconds a lap in raw car advantage is fairly dominant. There haven't been many races this year where anyone had that sort of consistent advantage from Saturday to Sunday.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1900
Location: Miami, Florida
I don't see how or where you came up with the notion that Vettel is shooting himself in the foot. he's correct in saying that Ferrari never had the dominant car in 2018. They had races where tracks better suited their car's strengths and other times where they made the right strategy call, but overall Mercedes was a hair better throughout the campaign. If you analyze the situation fully, the difference was likely down to the drivers more than the cars, with Bottas being the weakest of the top 4 guys and Hamilton the strongest and the current/final tally reflects that at this point. With Raikkonen in particular, he was better than the points and results reflect and he's been driving really well all season long. Some races where everyone felt he should have finished higher can be attributed to him preferring to drive cleaner and more fairly compared to others who'd simply resort to bullying people off the track to gain an advantage.

That's particularly what makes Kimi so special in my book. You rarely see that in sports these days, but it's the right way for professionals to conduct themselves and given that Kimi doesn't do those things, if you analyze his results, he's STILL one of the best in the biz.

_________________
HAMILTON :: ALONSO :: VETTEL :: RAIKKONEN :: RICCIARDO :: VERSTAPPEN
BOTTAS :: MAGNUSSEN :: OCON :: SAINZ :: PEREZ :: VANDOORNE :: HULKENBERG
GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: ERICSON :: LECLERC :: STROLL :: SEROTKIN :: HARTLEY


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28426
Exediron wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
The term "dominant car" is misleading the whole discussion. Clearly, the Ferrari was never at any point at the level of Mercedes in 2014-2016. However, in modern Formula 1, that level of dominance isn't needed to control the race, so long as you have an edge, you can pull out the gap - sit 5 seconds in front of the guy behind and protect yourself against the undercut. The only advantage that a "dominant" car has over a car with an edge, is when it comes to races with unexpected events - sudden rain, unfortunately timed safety car wiping out your lead. In races where this doesn't happen (which is the majority) then 0.4 seconds a lap is as a good as one with 4 seconds a lap to get the job done.

0.4 seconds a lap in raw car advantage is fairly dominant. There haven't been many races this year where anyone had that sort of consistent advantage from Saturday to Sunday.

The kind of gap that Hamilton claimed that Vettel had in Spa despite Vettel's claims that the cars were equal, they looked really equal the way Vettel passed him like he was stood still.

Vettel claims that Mercedes had an engine advantage last year that made it difficult to pass, this year the opposite is true but Vettel merely covers this as Ferrari no longer have a disadvantage.

A way to compartmentalise that Vettel personally wasn't responsibly for not winning the WDC, no mention of his personal mistakes, the Mercedes was merely the better car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 9:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6404
Location: Nebraska, USA
:lol:

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 9:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28426
Blake wrote:
:lol:

Thank you for your well thought out contribution.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 9:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3207
Exediron wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
The term "dominant car" is misleading the whole discussion. Clearly, the Ferrari was never at any point at the level of Mercedes in 2014-2016. However, in modern Formula 1, that level of dominance isn't needed to control the race, so long as you have an edge, you can pull out the gap - sit 5 seconds in front of the guy behind and protect yourself against the undercut. The only advantage that a "dominant" car has over a car with an edge, is when it comes to races with unexpected events - sudden rain, unfortunately timed safety car wiping out your lead. In races where this doesn't happen (which is the majority) then 0.4 seconds a lap is as a good as one with 4 seconds a lap to get the job done.

0.4 seconds a lap in raw car advantage is fairly dominant. There haven't been many races this year where anyone had that sort of consistent advantage from Saturday to Sunday.

I would tend to agree, however even a .2 second advantage would put you 10 seconds clear at the end of a 50 lap race, and that's without the 1 second spread there inevitably is by the end of lap 1. By lap 16, 0.2 lap advantage should put you 4 seconds ahead, which is able to respond to most undercuts.

There is another consideration as well. All this is based on equal drivers. If there supposition that Hamilton is faster than Vettel is correct, and he is adding 0.3 of a second, then when Ferrari has a 0.4 second advantage then it looks like 0.1 seconds, whereas when Mercedes has a 0.4 second advantage it looks like 0.7 seconds. In that situation, the Mercedes will look more dominant than the Ferrari (or the Ferrari more dominant than the Merc, if Vettel is 0.3 seconds faster than Hamilton)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 9:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28426
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
The term "dominant car" is misleading the whole discussion. Clearly, the Ferrari was never at any point at the level of Mercedes in 2014-2016. However, in modern Formula 1, that level of dominance isn't needed to control the race, so long as you have an edge, you can pull out the gap - sit 5 seconds in front of the guy behind and protect yourself against the undercut. The only advantage that a "dominant" car has over a car with an edge, is when it comes to races with unexpected events - sudden rain, unfortunately timed safety car wiping out your lead. In races where this doesn't happen (which is the majority) then 0.4 seconds a lap is as a good as one with 4 seconds a lap to get the job done.

0.4 seconds a lap in raw car advantage is fairly dominant. There haven't been many races this year where anyone had that sort of consistent advantage from Saturday to Sunday.

I would tend to agree, however even a .2 second advantage would put you 10 seconds clear at the end of a 50 lap race, and that's without the 1 second spread there inevitably is by the end of lap 1. By lap 16, 0.2 lap advantage should put you 4 seconds ahead, which is able to respond to most undercuts.

There is another consideration as well. All this is based on equal drivers. If there supposition that Hamilton is faster than Vettel is correct, and he is adding 0.3 of a second, then when Ferrari has a 0.4 second advantage then it looks like 0.1 seconds, whereas when Mercedes has a 0.4 second advantage it looks like 0.7 seconds. In that situation, the Mercedes will look more dominant than the Ferrari (or the Ferrari more dominant than the Merc, if Vettel is 0.3 seconds faster than Hamilton)

As a Hamilton fan I believe he is faster than Vettel but not by as much as 3 tenths or even 2 tenths.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 9:49 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6093
Location: Michigan, USA
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
The term "dominant car" is misleading the whole discussion. Clearly, the Ferrari was never at any point at the level of Mercedes in 2014-2016. However, in modern Formula 1, that level of dominance isn't needed to control the race, so long as you have an edge, you can pull out the gap - sit 5 seconds in front of the guy behind and protect yourself against the undercut. The only advantage that a "dominant" car has over a car with an edge, is when it comes to races with unexpected events - sudden rain, unfortunately timed safety car wiping out your lead. In races where this doesn't happen (which is the majority) then 0.4 seconds a lap is as a good as one with 4 seconds a lap to get the job done.

0.4 seconds a lap in raw car advantage is fairly dominant. There haven't been many races this year where anyone had that sort of consistent advantage from Saturday to Sunday.

The kind of gap that Hamilton claimed that Vettel had in Spa despite Vettel's claims that the cars were equal, they looked really equal the way Vettel passed him like he was stood still.

Vettel claims that Mercedes had an engine advantage last year that made it difficult to pass, this year the opposite is true but Vettel merely covers this as Ferrari no longer have a disadvantage.

A way to compartmentalise that Vettel personally wasn't responsibly for not winning the WDC, no mention of his personal mistakes, the Mercedes was merely the better car.

That gap in Spa was partly down to Ferrari's advantage on the straight, but mostly down to Mercedes' traction problems out of the slow corners - including the ones leading onto the straights. They had fixed that problem by Monza, and Ferrari no longer looked vastly quicker on the straights. A key component of how fast a car is on a straight is how fast it exits the preceding corner, after all.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 9:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28426
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
The term "dominant car" is misleading the whole discussion. Clearly, the Ferrari was never at any point at the level of Mercedes in 2014-2016. However, in modern Formula 1, that level of dominance isn't needed to control the race, so long as you have an edge, you can pull out the gap - sit 5 seconds in front of the guy behind and protect yourself against the undercut. The only advantage that a "dominant" car has over a car with an edge, is when it comes to races with unexpected events - sudden rain, unfortunately timed safety car wiping out your lead. In races where this doesn't happen (which is the majority) then 0.4 seconds a lap is as a good as one with 4 seconds a lap to get the job done.

0.4 seconds a lap in raw car advantage is fairly dominant. There haven't been many races this year where anyone had that sort of consistent advantage from Saturday to Sunday.

The kind of gap that Hamilton claimed that Vettel had in Spa despite Vettel's claims that the cars were equal, they looked really equal the way Vettel passed him like he was stood still.

Vettel claims that Mercedes had an engine advantage last year that made it difficult to pass, this year the opposite is true but Vettel merely covers this as Ferrari no longer have a disadvantage.

A way to compartmentalise that Vettel personally wasn't responsibly for not winning the WDC, no mention of his personal mistakes, the Mercedes was merely the better car.

That gap in Spa was partly down to Ferrari's advantage on the straight, but mostly down to Mercedes' traction problems out of the slow corners - including the ones leading onto the straights. They had fixed that problem by Monza, and Ferrari no longer looked vastly quicker on the straights. A key component of how fast a car is on a straight is how fast it exits the preceding corner, after all.

I except your explanation in part but even later at Singapore the onboards showed Vettel's Ferrari accelerating faster down the straights than Hamilton's Mercedes even when he was on his pole lap.

You still accept that the Ferrari was faster on the straights but that's something that Vettel himself leaves out even though he thought it important to mention it in 2017 by saying that the Mercedes was faster on the straights which made it hard to pass.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 10:26 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6093
Location: Michigan, USA
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
The term "dominant car" is misleading the whole discussion. Clearly, the Ferrari was never at any point at the level of Mercedes in 2014-2016. However, in modern Formula 1, that level of dominance isn't needed to control the race, so long as you have an edge, you can pull out the gap - sit 5 seconds in front of the guy behind and protect yourself against the undercut. The only advantage that a "dominant" car has over a car with an edge, is when it comes to races with unexpected events - sudden rain, unfortunately timed safety car wiping out your lead. In races where this doesn't happen (which is the majority) then 0.4 seconds a lap is as a good as one with 4 seconds a lap to get the job done.

0.4 seconds a lap in raw car advantage is fairly dominant. There haven't been many races this year where anyone had that sort of consistent advantage from Saturday to Sunday.

The kind of gap that Hamilton claimed that Vettel had in Spa despite Vettel's claims that the cars were equal, they looked really equal the way Vettel passed him like he was stood still.

Vettel claims that Mercedes had an engine advantage last year that made it difficult to pass, this year the opposite is true but Vettel merely covers this as Ferrari no longer have a disadvantage.

A way to compartmentalise that Vettel personally wasn't responsibly for not winning the WDC, no mention of his personal mistakes, the Mercedes was merely the better car.

That gap in Spa was partly down to Ferrari's advantage on the straight, but mostly down to Mercedes' traction problems out of the slow corners - including the ones leading onto the straights. They had fixed that problem by Monza, and Ferrari no longer looked vastly quicker on the straights. A key component of how fast a car is on a straight is how fast it exits the preceding corner, after all.

I except your explanation in part but even later at Singapore the onboards showed Vettel's Ferrari accelerating faster down the straights than Hamilton's Mercedes even when he was on his pole lap.

You still accept that the Ferrari was faster on the straights but that's something that Vettel himself leaves out even though he thought it important to mention it in 2017 by saying that the Mercedes was faster on the straights which made it hard to pass.

Well, I'm not driving the Ferrari. If I say it's faster on the straights it doesn't make me look bad! :]

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 03, 2018 5:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 973
olly-44 wrote:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferrari-never-dominant-car-vettel/3207115/

So I've just read the above article (sorry Planet F1 - I still read your articles!)...and couldn't help but think Vettel has shot himself in the foot.

He's done this because he is partly right in what he is saying. Where he is partly wrong is that Ferrari DID have a dominant car in certain races - Bahrain, Montreal, China, Baku...but where he is partly right is that they only had A STRONG CAR for most of the season just like Mercedes had a strong/dominant and weak car from race to race too.

Thing is, Hamilton clearly made the difference because if we agree that both Ferrari and Mercedes had a equally dominant/strong car for the season then what Vettel is essentially saying is that he couldn't make the difference, whereas Hamilton could - hence shooting himself in the foot.

See what I'm saying forum peeps? Or am I being too tabloidy and making an unjust opinion on the matter?


You are being unjust and tabloid.
Give it up already, Lewis won, why do you still feel the need to kick the other guy while he is down


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 03, 2018 3:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1648
AravJ wrote:
olly-44 wrote:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferrari-never-dominant-car-vettel/3207115/

So I've just read the above article (sorry Planet F1 - I still read your articles!)...and couldn't help but think Vettel has shot himself in the foot.

He's done this because he is partly right in what he is saying. Where he is partly wrong is that Ferrari DID have a dominant car in certain races - Bahrain, Montreal, China, Baku...but where he is partly right is that they only had A STRONG CAR for most of the season just like Mercedes had a strong/dominant and weak car from race to race too.

Thing is, Hamilton clearly made the difference because if we agree that both Ferrari and Mercedes had a equally dominant/strong car for the season then what Vettel is essentially saying is that he couldn't make the difference, whereas Hamilton could - hence shooting himself in the foot.

See what I'm saying forum peeps? Or am I being too tabloidy and making an unjust opinion on the matter?



You are being unjust and tabloid.
Give it up already, Lewis won, why do you still feel the need to kick the other guy while he is down


It's like they are not fulfilled or contented with Hamilton winning so starting threads on a lot of nonsense, he deserves it, he's driven his best and blah blah blah.

No one deserves a WDC you win it any setbacks or pitfalls are exactly what they are, Brundle started this nonsense in '12 when Vettel won against Alonso.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 03, 2018 7:34 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6093
Location: Michigan, USA
Rockie wrote:
No one deserves a WDC you win it any setbacks or pitfalls are exactly what they are, Brundle started this nonsense in '12 when Vettel won against Alonso.

BS. It's been around since at least the end of the 80s / start of the 90s. There are plenty of people who think Senna didn't deserve the 1988 title, Prost didn't deserve the 1989 title, Senna didn't deserve the 1990 title, Schumacher didn't deserve the 1994 title...

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 03, 2018 8:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1648
Exediron wrote:
Rockie wrote:
No one deserves a WDC you win it any setbacks or pitfalls are exactly what they are, Brundle started this nonsense in '12 when Vettel won against Alonso.

BS. It's been around since at least the end of the 80s / start of the 90s. There are plenty of people who think Senna didn't deserve the 1988 title, Prost didn't deserve the 1989 title, Senna didn't deserve the 1990 title, Schumacher didn't deserve the 1994 title...


All the above listed are about them cheating or being unsportsmanlike when they won.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 03, 2018 9:19 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6093
Location: Michigan, USA
Rockie wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Rockie wrote:
No one deserves a WDC you win it any setbacks or pitfalls are exactly what they are, Brundle started this nonsense in '12 when Vettel won against Alonso.

BS. It's been around since at least the end of the 80s / start of the 90s. There are plenty of people who think Senna didn't deserve the 1988 title, Prost didn't deserve the 1989 title, Senna didn't deserve the 1990 title, Schumacher didn't deserve the 1994 title...

All the above listed are about them cheating or being unsportsmanlike when they won.

Not 1988, that's just about Prost having more points and losing due to the system of the time.

But okay, how about 2009? I remember plenty of people saying Button only won because of the car and he didn't deserve to be WDC.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 04, 2018 5:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:27 pm
Posts: 167
In the immediate aftermath people can defend Vettel and make excuses all they want but I suspect Father Time will not be so kind to him and Ferrari as a whole the way they managed to botch this campaign. Fact is the car was there for them for the majority of the season.
Races they clearly had an advantage over Mercedes include Bahrain where they won even with the wrong tyre strategy which allowed Bottas to come back at Vettel forwards the end of the race.
In China Ferrari qualified over 5 tenths clear of Mercedes and strategic blunder allowed Bottas to jump Vettel through the pit stop phase plus safety car cost them.
In Azerbaijan Ferrari qualified on pole and should have locked out the front row were it not for Kimi messing up his final Q3 lap, and Vettel was controlling the race easily but another pit stop blunder left them vulnerable to a safety car and cost them the lead.
In Monaco Ferrari were clearly faster than Mercedes and Vettel qualified and finished ahead of Hamilton.

In Canada Vettel dominated the race.
In Austria Vettel had a 5 place grid penalty and should have won the race if starting from more normal position. He had so much pace than anybody else in the race and even managed to pass the Mercedes of Hamilton.
In Britain Ferrari should have qualified on pole but Hamilton pulled out one of his special quali laps to deny them. In the race Vettel easily pulled away from Bottas.
Ferrari had the advantage all weekend in Germany but then Vettel crashed in the race.
In Hungary Ferrari had the pace advantage all weekend but they lost position due to wet conditions in qualifying.
In Belgium Ferrari also had the pace advantage all weekend only this time wet conditions in qualifying did not cost them the win such was their advantage in straight line speed.
Again Monza Ferrari locked out the front row but mistakes on track and on strategy cost them the win.
In Singapore Ferrari just blundered through the whole weeken starting with a questionable tyre allocation choice, Vettel’s mistake in Free Practice plus what Vettel himself discribed as a messy qualifying meant that they underperformed so much so that even Redbull managed to beat them in qualifying and in the race.
After ditching some bad upgrades Ferrari were to their normal level and could once again easily outperform Mercedes in USA and in Mexico.

Ok maybe some would give Singapore to Mercedes but that still leaves 13/19 race Ferrari were better than Mercedes. Ferrari and Vettel have had ample opportunity to grab both titles but instead they lost their way in critical moments and let the pressure get to them. The first stage of grief is denial and clearly Vettel does not want to admit that he got beaten in a fair fight and want to make it look like Mercedes had a better car by convoluting the conversation with that s talk of dominant races. Did he have the car to win the title? The answer is unequivocal yes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2282
I count eight races where Mercedes had better race pace:

Australia, Spain, France, Austria, Silverstone, Singapore, Russia, Japan.

In Silverstone, Ferrari may have been faster in qualy, but Mercedes clearly had better tyre management.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 2:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:54 pm
Posts: 1035
olly-44 wrote:
Thing is, Hamilton clearly made the difference because if we agree that both Ferrari and Mercedes had a equally dominant/strong car for the season then what Vettel is essentially saying is that he couldn't make the difference, whereas Hamilton could - hence shooting himself in the foot.


I think this sums it up.

Lewis has made the difference but there are other factors too. Merc have made less mistakes and willing to use team orders to get the job done.

Just think how close it would be if Ferrari didn't make mistakes, had team orders, didn't struggle in the wet and Sebastian didn't have incidents. This championship would be taken to the wire and in favour of Ferrari. The fact that Ferrari reverted their car setup and magically Kimi walked away with a win... the slowest of the two Ferrari drivers.. what does that say. I love Kimi but he has barely been a match for Sebastian since day 1.

Vettel has said several times this year that they have been their own enemy... that really does say it all. And how Horner/Marko still feel like god parents to Seb would indicate that there is something wrong at Ferrari. Maybe he assumed he'd be given Michael/Fernando status (clear number 1)...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2018 1:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:27 pm
Posts: 167
KingVoid wrote:
I count eight races where Mercedes had better race pace:

Australia, Spain, France, Austria, Silverstone, Singapore, Russia, Japan.

In Silverstone, Ferrari may have been faster in qualy, but Mercedes clearly had better tyre management.

In Austria Ferrari were faster than Mercedes. Had Vettel not had a grid penalty and started the race in a more normal position he would have easily won the race. Vettel on older tyres caught and made a clean pass on Hamilton on track. I don’t know how anyone can give that to Mercedes. And Silverstone it can not be definitively said that Mercedes had better tyre wear than Ferrari.


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: Exediron 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