planetf1.com

It is currently Sat Nov 01, 2014 12:39 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 3966
mcdo wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.

I wouldn't rule out a lot of what you said until I got to this part. I have never seen anything that suggests Hamilton adapts better than Alonso does. Quite the contrary in fact.


Indeed. Alonso has been a race winner with several different teams. Hamilton has never left McLaren, I don't think he's ever had to adapt to a new car

_________________
ΜΣ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:51 am
Posts: 33
Covalent wrote:
a.rellum wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
[b]No one would be able to beat Vettel in a Red Bull, the Red Bull is designed for Vettel, or rather Vettel has learned to drive the car to exploit the unusual characteristics of Adrian Newey's design philosophy. It would take Alonso and Hamilton, too long to catch up. [/b]This is the reason why Webber was equal with Vettel at the beginning of the season, because Red Bull could not get their rear end to work as they wanted it to resulting in a more normal handling car. Once they sorted out the problems Vettel could drive it in the way that Newey had envisaged it.

It's very similar to the Mansell/Patrese '92 season; Mansell trusted the active suspension to work how Newey had said it would whereas Patrese did not. The 2011 car was very similar when the exhaust blowing was at its most advanced, and that's why Vettel dominated Webber. At the beginning of 2012 the Red Bull's system was not working so it behaved like a traditional F1 car. At the end of 2012 it was working again (although not to the same extremes of 2011).

I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.


Plain rubbish, the car is designed too be fast out of corners and be grippy, If you would put Hamilton in the same car he would need no less than a couple of practice sessions too get the hand of it. I would like too ad Alonso and Kimi too that list too.

Vettel did not dominate Webber, Webber is just not that good of a driver as lets say Ham or Kimi. And too say the reason he did was because the exhaust blowing was at it most advanced is just utter utter bollocks.

OMG deal with the psychological pressure of being up against Vettel...hahaha dont make me laugh they would both dominate him in that Newey car.

I see you've only recently signed on this forum but that's not a very polite way to start an discussion with someone who has just written a well argumented post.


What part i've made a valid argument too his claims.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:51 am
Posts: 33
SchumieRules wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.

I wouldn't rule out a lot of what you said until I got to this part. I have never seen anything that suggests Hamilton adapts better than Alonso does. Quite the contrary in fact.


Indeed. Alonso has been a race winner with several different teams. Hamilton has never left McLaren, I don't think he's ever had to adapt to a new car


They adapt too a new car EVERY year. because every eyar the car changes so do the rulings.
Allow me too illustrate.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 3966
a.rellum wrote:
SchumieRules wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.

I wouldn't rule out a lot of what you said until I got to this part. I have never seen anything that suggests Hamilton adapts better than Alonso does. Quite the contrary in fact.


Indeed. Alonso has been a race winner with several different teams. Hamilton has never left McLaren, I don't think he's ever had to adapt to a new car


They adapt too a new car EVERY year. because every eyar the car changes so do the rulings.
Allow me too illustrate.



We are talking about going to Red Bull, a new team, and adapting there. Alonso has adapted to new teams and new cars before. Hamilton has never done that. This doesn't mean he is not able to. Just that he never had to do it. Therefore I disagree that he is the most adaptable of the two drivers.

_________________
ΜΣ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 2076
a.rellum wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
[b]No one would be able to beat Vettel in a Red Bull, the Red Bull is designed for Vettel, or rather Vettel has learned to drive the car to exploit the unusual characteristics of Adrian Newey's design philosophy. It would take Alonso and Hamilton, too long to catch up. [/b]This is the reason why Webber was equal with Vettel at the beginning of the season, because Red Bull could not get their rear end to work as they wanted it to resulting in a more normal handling car. Once they sorted out the problems Vettel could drive it in the way that Newey had envisaged it.

It's very similar to the Mansell/Patrese '92 season; Mansell trusted the active suspension to work how Newey had said it would whereas Patrese did not. The 2011 car was very similar when the exhaust blowing was at its most advanced, and that's why Vettel dominated Webber. At the beginning of 2012 the Red Bull's system was not working so it behaved like a traditional F1 car. At the end of 2012 it was working again (although not to the same extremes of 2011).

I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.


Plain rubbish, the car is designed too be fast out of corners and be grippy, If you would put Hamilton in the same car he would need no less than a couple of practice sessions too get the hand of it. I would like too ad Alonso and Kimi too that list too.

Vettel did not dominate Webber, Webber is just not that good of a driver as lets say Ham or Kimi. And too say the reason he did was because the exhaust blowing was at it most advanced is just utter utter bollocks.

OMG deal with the psychological pressure of being up against Vettel...hahaha dont make me laugh they would both dominate him in that Newey car.

I don't have time to get involved in a discussion if it's not going to be conducted in a rational manner so if your response to this post is similar to the one above then I will not bother replying.

Formula 1 is not such a simple equation as Driver X is faster than Driver Y in Team A, Driver Y is faster than Driver Z in Team B, therefore Driver X will be faster than Driver Z in Team C. Cars are designed around drivers and drivers learn to drive in different styles.

Adrian Newey's philosophy around the current line of Red Bull cars has been to use the exhaust blowing to seal the diffuser, run the car at high rake and suck the rear end down to the track. To get the most out of the car requires the driver to drive the car in a very counter-intuitive style. That requires a driver to be able to driver against his instincts, effectively act against what his reflexes are telling him to do. Younger drivers are always going to be able to do this more easily than drivers who have been in the sport for a long time.

That's not to say Vettel is not faster than Webber, however it does also give him a big advantage. Webber himself even commented at the beginning of the season that the RB8 was "more like a normal F1 car to drive" than the RB7. And at the beginning of the season Webber was matching Vettel better than he did in the second half.

Because the 2012 regulations outlawed directly channelling exhaust gases to the diffuser this meant the 2012 system was never anywhere near as powerful as the 2011 system. This meant that even after Red Bull got it working Webber was able to be more competitive compared to Vettel (plus, he would have started to adapt to it)

I have no doubt that Hamilton and Alonso would be able to adapt to the system quicker than Webber, and would probably be close to Vettel's pace after a couple of practice sessions. But Vettel had 3 seasons of prior experience of how the car handled on each track, as well as the general head start on getting the most out of the system. They would always be playing catch up - which while the gap would close due to the laws of diminishing returns - it would not be made up in a couple of practice sessions, or even a couple of races.

As for the "psychological pressure of being up against Vettel" - I said Alonso would be able to deal that. Hamilton would have a much tougher time. Hamilton's biggest weakness is his mental strength and dealing with pressure. And he has already demonstrated that Vettel in particular gets in his head. Vettel's success contributed significantly to his 2011 break down, and even in 2012 he showed it had not gone completely (In Malaysia when the team radioed to ask what tyres he wanted, he radioed back to ask what Vettel was doing)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 9:29 pm
Posts: 867
Location: Qart-Hadast
Johnston wrote:
Oh and what does it say when he hasn't beaten Alonso in the WDC since '09?
LoL that chart speaks for itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 7488
ashley313 wrote:
Haribo wrote:
ashley313 wrote:
Some drivers have been able to overcome poor reliability, team mistakes, and weak car performance to still finish in the top 3.

LOL.

I don't know why you think that's so funny. Let's look at 2012. Lewis had a couple of mechanical failures, a couple of pit stop mistakes, and the team cocked up his fuel once, with a car that was generally quickest at most rounds. Sebastian had a couple of mechanical failures, pit stops that were, on average, a couple of tenths slower than the McLaren guys, and the team cocked up his fuel once, in a car that was quickest at maybe 6 or 7 races. Fernando had good reliability, and solid work from his team, but had a car that was only the best 1 or 2 weekends, and sometimes quite far from the best while his rivals were never worse than 2nd or 3rd quickest. Kimi was in a new team, with pit stops consistently quite far from the top teams, a lot of practice time spent running parts they never raced, a bunch of really awful strategy calls, and a car that was only super quick a few times. If Lewis had contract drama to distract him, then Sebastian and Fernando had constant parts legality scandals, politicking over who is each other's biggest competitor, and general mind game nonsense to distract them as well. Sub Kimi's race rustiness in for drama on his end. Yes, some had more luck than others, but I think on balance they all had fairly equal negatives/stumbling blocks/resistance/obstacles...and we know in which order they finished the season.

As final points - getting the most from your team, which helps minimize mistakes on their end, improves efficiency, and keeps energy levels up which is just good for everything, is part of being a good title contender, and so is putting yourself in a team where you can do that. Being able to manage your career or work with people who can manage your career to give you the best possible chance to succeed is part of being a title contender.

You do realise that if Hulkenburg had not crashed Hamilton out of the race in Brazil he would have finished 3rd in the WDC?

The 4 races you mention as casual run of the mill retirements/problems cost him 3 wins, the above incident maybe another win, then throw in another 2 races being crashed out by opponents, 2 races driving the entire race with defective components in the rear of his car, and a race ending puncture. Thats 9 races in a 20 race schedule, i think that would seriously impact anyones chances of winning the WDC.

Perhaps you should point out where Hamilton was responsible also all the races where the Mclaren was the fastest car?

Its also interesting to note how the teams dealt with the qualifying disqualifications, McLaren put Hamilton on an almost impossible one stop strategy against the 2 stop strategies whilst Red Bull were far more inventive with their approach which yielded a much better result, was this of Vettel's own doing?

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 1st


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 7488
ashley313 wrote:
Haribo wrote:
ashley313 wrote:
The ones since his championship where he finished 4th or 5th. Oh wait, that's all of them.

Team principals driver ratings.
Hamilton was definitively rated as top 3 driver beyond 2007 & 2008
only exception 2011 (4th), where Hamilton had a off season due to personal problems



The only team principal voting that matters is the voting they do with their team's checkbook and their decision making. So far only 1 of the recently successful teams has chosen to "vote" for Lewis, and that's McLaren (who have fewer titles than the other 3 teams over the course of the careers of the drivers we have been discussing).

Thats because the other 2 teams are effectively protecting their #2 drivers, Horner has already gone on record as saying so and it must be quite obvious that Alonso has a veto on Hamilton

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 1st


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 6:41 pm
Posts: 6587
pokerman wrote:
You do realise that if Hulkenburg had not crashed Hamilton out of the race in Brazil he would have finished 3rd in the WDC?

The 4 races you mention as casual run of the mill retirements/problems cost him 3 wins, the above incident maybe another win, then throw in another 2 races being crashed out by opponents, 2 races driving the entire race with defective components in the rear of his car, and a race ending puncture. Thats 9 races in a 20 race schedule, i think that would seriously impact anyones chances of winning the WDC.

Perhaps you should point out where Hamilton was responsible also all the races where the Mclaren was the fastest car?

Its also interesting to note how the teams dealt with the qualifying disqualifications, McLaren put Hamilton on an almost impossible one stop strategy against the 2 stop strategies whilst Red Bull were far more inventive with their approach which yielded a much better result, was this of Vettel's own doing?


And if Grosjean hadn't have hit Alonso in Spa Alonso would be WDC.

Vets strategy was a gamble that paid off because of safety cars. The same result in Spain could not have been guaranteed.

Also due to the way Red Bull and McLaren differ in their approaches like final gear ratios, quali pace Vs Race Pace it was more beneficial for Red Bull than the McLaren in the first place.

_________________
Disclaimer: The above post maybe tongue in cheek.

"I thought I'd get your theories, mock them, then embrace my own. The usual."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 7488
sandyf1 wrote:
Though i am not much of a hamilton fan, i don't think he made any mistakes this season barring maybe valencia and that too was about 70-30 maldonado's fault. But how exactly is hamilton a better driver now than in 2007 ?
What exactly has he shown in his speed , racecraft etc that is so much of an improvement compared to his debut season?
Coming back on topic i would say only alonso, hamilton , kimi & button could beat vettel but only in certain scenarios.

Well its being argued by some that he is actually a worse driver

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 1st


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 7488
ashley313 wrote:
Firstly - I left out the incidents for ALL of the drivers that involved crashing out, or a crash otherwise ruining a race, because everyone can just argue back and forth about who was at fault for each one of them. They all had times where they cocked up, and they all had incidents where they were totally innocent.

Not one driver on the grid had a mistake-free season in 2012 (or any season for that matter). Some cost more than others. Some made more errors, but still came out ahead, because there is more to winning a season than driving well. As I said, a driver must rally a team to perform at its best, and he must get himself into a team where he can do that. Its all part of being a title contender.

I have never said Lewis drove poorly - on the contrary I think he drove really well most of the time. But that isn't enough, and the difference isn't all down to luck or who has Adrian. Its who fights for it, who keeps the garage going. Its managing your emotions when it counts, ignoring all distractions, turning pressure into motivation, believing you can do it, maximizing results when you haven't been dealt the best hand, and sticking with your process, not just for yourself but for your team. If you've ever worked in a team you know that everyone works just a little bit harder, comes up with just a little more efficient methods, checks everything that one extra time, goes above and beyond the standard, when you have leaders that make you want to. That's the difference when everything is as close as it is right now. You can be amazing in the car, and its just not enough.

When you are the driver, and you are the one ultimately delivering the results - NOTHING is out of your hands. You do everything you need to to make sure your weekend goes to plan. You need to use your influence to ensure the car is right, the mechanics don't make mistakes, and you use your judgement to make sure the mistakes of others on track don't cost you.

That seems a bit like leave out all the things that don't prop up your arguement

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 1st


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 7488
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
No one would be able to beat Vettel in a Red Bull, the Red Bull is designed for Vettel, or rather Vettel has learned to drive the car to exploit the unusual characteristics of Adrian Newey's design philosophy. It would take Alonso and Hamilton, too long to catch up. This is the reason why Webber was equal with Vettel at the beginning of the season, because Red Bull could not get their rear end to work as they wanted it to resulting in a more normal handling car. Once they sorted out the problems Vettel could drive it in the way that Newey had envisaged it.

It's very similar to the Mansell/Patrese '92 season; Mansell trusted the active suspension to work how Newey had said it would whereas Patrese did not. The 2011 car was very similar when the exhaust blowing was at its most advanced, and that's why Vettel dominated Webber. At the beginning of 2012 the Red Bull's system was not working so it behaved like a traditional F1 car. At the end of 2012 it was working again (although not to the same extremes of 2011).

I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.

Just because Webber can't drive such a car is no proof that others couldn't, in particular both Hamilton and Alonso

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 1st


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 2076
pokerman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
No one would be able to beat Vettel in a Red Bull, the Red Bull is designed for Vettel, or rather Vettel has learned to drive the car to exploit the unusual characteristics of Adrian Newey's design philosophy. It would take Alonso and Hamilton, too long to catch up. This is the reason why Webber was equal with Vettel at the beginning of the season, because Red Bull could not get their rear end to work as they wanted it to resulting in a more normal handling car. Once they sorted out the problems Vettel could drive it in the way that Newey had envisaged it.

It's very similar to the Mansell/Patrese '92 season; Mansell trusted the active suspension to work how Newey had said it would whereas Patrese did not. The 2011 car was very similar when the exhaust blowing was at its most advanced, and that's why Vettel dominated Webber. At the beginning of 2012 the Red Bull's system was not working so it behaved like a traditional F1 car. At the end of 2012 it was working again (although not to the same extremes of 2011).

I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.

Just because Webber can't drive such a car is no proof that others couldn't, in particular both Hamilton and Alonso

I never said that Hamilton and Alonso wouldn't be able to, in fact, I said they probably would be able to.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 7488
Johnston wrote:
pokerman wrote:
You do realise that if Hulkenburg had not crashed Hamilton out of the race in Brazil he would have finished 3rd in the WDC?

The 4 races you mention as casual run of the mill retirements/problems cost him 3 wins, the above incident maybe another win, then throw in another 2 races being crashed out by opponents, 2 races driving the entire race with defective components in the rear of his car, and a race ending puncture. Thats 9 races in a 20 race schedule, i think that would seriously impact anyones chances of winning the WDC.

Perhaps you should point out where Hamilton was responsible also all the races where the Mclaren was the fastest car?

Its also interesting to note how the teams dealt with the qualifying disqualifications, McLaren put Hamilton on an almost impossible one stop strategy against the 2 stop strategies whilst Red Bull were far more inventive with their approach which yielded a much better result, was this of Vettel's own doing?


And if Grosjean hadn't have hit Alonso in Spa Alonso would be WDC.

Vets strategy was a gamble that paid off because of safety cars. The same result in Spain could not have been guaranteed.

Also due to the way Red Bull and McLaren differ in their approaches like final gear ratios, quali pace Vs Race Pace it was more beneficial for Red Bull than the McLaren in the first place.

The McLaren still probably has a compromised race set up, interesting how one misfortune for Alonso can write off all of Hamilton's misfortunes?

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 1st


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 7488
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
No one would be able to beat Vettel in a Red Bull, the Red Bull is designed for Vettel, or rather Vettel has learned to drive the car to exploit the unusual characteristics of Adrian Newey's design philosophy. It would take Alonso and Hamilton, too long to catch up. This is the reason why Webber was equal with Vettel at the beginning of the season, because Red Bull could not get their rear end to work as they wanted it to resulting in a more normal handling car. Once they sorted out the problems Vettel could drive it in the way that Newey had envisaged it.

It's very similar to the Mansell/Patrese '92 season; Mansell trusted the active suspension to work how Newey had said it would whereas Patrese did not. The 2011 car was very similar when the exhaust blowing was at its most advanced, and that's why Vettel dominated Webber. At the beginning of 2012 the Red Bull's system was not working so it behaved like a traditional F1 car. At the end of 2012 it was working again (although not to the same extremes of 2011).

I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.

Just because Webber can't drive such a car is no proof that others couldn't, in particular both Hamilton and Alonso

I never said that Hamilton and Alonso wouldn't be able to, in fact, I said they probably would be able to.

But saying they wouldn't be able to beat him is almost the same i would think?

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 1st


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 2076
pokerman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
No one would be able to beat Vettel in a Red Bull, the Red Bull is designed for Vettel, or rather Vettel has learned to drive the car to exploit the unusual characteristics of Adrian Newey's design philosophy. It would take Alonso and Hamilton, too long to catch up. This is the reason why Webber was equal with Vettel at the beginning of the season, because Red Bull could not get their rear end to work as they wanted it to resulting in a more normal handling car. Once they sorted out the problems Vettel could drive it in the way that Newey had envisaged it.

It's very similar to the Mansell/Patrese '92 season; Mansell trusted the active suspension to work how Newey had said it would whereas Patrese did not. The 2011 car was very similar when the exhaust blowing was at its most advanced, and that's why Vettel dominated Webber. At the beginning of 2012 the Red Bull's system was not working so it behaved like a traditional F1 car. At the end of 2012 it was working again (although not to the same extremes of 2011).

I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.

Just because Webber can't drive such a car is no proof that others couldn't, in particular both Hamilton and Alonso

I never said that Hamilton and Alonso wouldn't be able to, in fact, I said they probably would be able to.

But saying they wouldn't be able to beat him is almost the same i would think?

No. Webber started driving the current iteration of the Red Bull design at the same time as Vettel when it was introduced in 2009. Vettel would have a 4 year advantage in understanding the car, which as I said in both my previous posts has a counter intuitive way of extracting the most from it, over Hamilton or Alonso if they joined him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:06 am
Posts: 2334
The points Alienturnedhuman made about different driver styles suiting different aspects of cars are informative and valid. That was a very good analysis of Mansell vs Patrese with the 1992 Williams-Renault.

Button, Raikkonen and Trulli are/were known for their sensitive style and often had trouble with tyre-warming. All drivers have strengths and weaknesses, Alonso's used to be sudden turn-in.

What is being discussed is whether any other driver could beat Vettel at Red Bull. This is hypothetical, and most of assume 'our' driver would be at his peak/best in the situation. Imo between Vettel, Hamilton and Alonso the speed differences would be minimal over a season, and the wins would virtually be shared if they were in same-cars. Kimi at his best would be in here too.

I am enjoying the many different views on the various drivers by posters here. Interesting and provocative OP; keep going.

_________________
http://grandprixratings.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 3936
M.Nader -DODZ- wrote:
POBRatings wrote:
M Nader asked how would JB and KR do against Vettel.
Interesting one, because in some ways Jenson and Kimi are similar drivers, very sensitive to chassis balance and sometimes being too smooth to warm their tyres.

I think Vettel would beat them both in same-cars.

JB is not as fast as Lewis, and I don't reckon Kimi would be quite as fast as Seb,Lewis, or Fred. Kimi's two year break surely could not quite match him to the other three who have been going at the top all the time?

KR should be faster in 2013 if his car /team are sound. Was the Lotus-Renault really fast in 2012, or was it the two drivers?
KR against JB in same cars? Would be a good one. Posters views?


I respectfully disagree, I agree that Kimi, Button and Alonso are not as fast as Lewis or Vettel.

But over a season i would put my money on the former 3 against the latter 2. i would say Button, Alonso and Kimi are race specialists while Lewis and Seb are quali specialists.


You don't have to play what if with two of those pairings have already happened ..

Lewis 2-1 Jenson
Lewis 1-0 Fernando.

Both opposite to your prediction, everybodies entitled to an opinion.

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
breathemyexhaust wrote:
Oh please, bourbon, stop with affecting to be in some community of privileged wisdom with Ashley and others of his persuasion. Every time you make some statement like such and such a supposed dictum will "fall by deaf ears" you are insulting whatever portion of the forum would dissent from Ashley's assertion had they registered it, which likelihood you are so enthusiastically doubtful of occurring. If that is your intention, by all means be my guest as I don't at all believe that a forum should be a place of civility as the mods and many of our Kumbaya posters would have it.

By the way Ashley, it was about time for an avatar change. Of course, discerning readers would be able to ascribe any of your posts to the author proper without that or any identifying features other than the quirks of veiled partiality which are your writing trade. Notice how he overextended himself with calling out Hamilton's post-2007 championship place record, following on that to state that Hamilton was an eschewed article as far as the collective pocketbooks of the f1 garages bar Mercedes' are concerned and that this was a direct index of the esteem in which he is held by the various team principals. Then with the abruptness of cowardice or the good hearing bourbon wishes for all our constituency (as a cowing argument was being leveled at him loud and clear) he, a person yet fairly on the attack, proceeded to back-peddle, after the most modest of factual rebuttals by lamo and others (citing the place finishes of senna and Prost in the 80s among other things) into stammering (figuratively) that 'hey that was a different time and place, things don't translate la di da di da' to save his dignity.
The funny thing is, and forgive this digression, that him and others of his ilk (I refer to mcnader, johnston and so on) are quick to trot out the newly furbished point aggregate argument vis-a-vis Jenson and Lewis without asking themselves a couple of very simple questions whose answers would have brought them a measure of perspective in the midst of their polemical zeal. How many of the frequenters of this forum can name, off the top of their head, how many race wins or pole positions Michael Schumacher has or for that matter those of any other formula one drivers? Now how many of these same people can recall how many career points the drivers in question have totaled? Though this is hardly common knowledge I myself know Schumacher holds 91 wins and 68 poles, Vettel 26 and 36, Alonso, 30 and 22, and so forth, but I couldn't offer how many points any of them have tallied if it meant my life. The first number (of capable individuals) frankly dwarfs the latter. When Schumacher broke down at that televised press conference was it because he had passed Senna's record for points? No? I thought not. Now why is that? Because points is the flimsiest, least permanent, least translatable, and least comparative measure in f1. Can f1 drivers place points on their household mantle top and shine them for the occasional visit by the in-laws, pawn them for money when they are hard by like Bjorn Borg almost did with his Wimbledon trophies some years past? When you are trying to quickly establish the caliber of an f1 driver to a motorsport amateur do you say "check it out, so-and-so accumulated 1000 points throughout their racing career!' there is no immediate impact to such a statement. But to say that "so and so had 20 or so race wins" helps to quickly locate them in the pantheon for the auditor.
And, this is a more temperamental matter and so I understand completely when many thinking posters diverge from me on the matter but podiums are in a way a semi-ignominious statistic to cite in pride. One of the things I admire about Hamilton is that of course he wants and is slowly modifying his racing approach to collect as many podiums as possible when nothing better is competitively achievable but deep down he looks on them with the kind of wry attitude that implies a sort of ethos of self-reproach on earning them reasoning 'if I was good enough to secure a third or second place position then I was good enough to win the race and should have even by actively courting a completely penurious outcome by thoroughgoing efforts to get an ultimate victory; only if I never was in with an opportunity should I be content with whatever place I could salvage; another one of these in hand is nothing to smile about'. But you get the sense that Button puts an inordinate amount of pride and stock in the acquisition of mere podiums, the psychology of an also-ran and while he isn't one himself a mentality to which I feel Alonso has fallen prey as of late and sadly to his detriment. Say what you want about Vettel but he does understand this is a winners league not a playing the percentages league. In basically only a fifth of the season he turned his championship chances around by getting WINS. Who won the championship this year? The person with the most wins. The championship as we've come to understand it for the last 20-plus years asks a very straightforward thing of any aspirant. You generally have to win at least 4 or 5 races and then mix it up properly for the rest of the season. When, the styled arch-cerebral Prost was tussling with senna he took care to usually win five or six races on the year. But see Alonso talking about maximizing his points and thinking he can hold on with a three win season when a truly maximizing approach hunts for WINS. If I was his coach I would almost tell him not to directly think about the championship at all but to get back to the level of expectation he had with Renault and even McLaren. I actually think that counter to prevailing opinion on the subject spending too much time in inadequate and midfield cars (which is what Alonso has been doing for most of his post-McLaren career) works to dull your self-expectation such that at critical junctures when you are positioned to take a win you are less capable of doing so simply by dint of the prospect no longer obtaining in one's mind as a thing that MUST for one's sense of self-respect be accomplished. If Alonso can even just get five wins next year I'm pretty sure the rest of it will take care of itself, even if Vettel is able to win seven.
So, to bring my thread back to the points aggregate argument, if button partisans wanted to land a blow they would really have to summon statistics regarding championships and wins and poles none of which flatter their picked man. What sort of real racer has less poles than years he has been in f1, with every year from 2009 to now certainly being paired with a car capable of them? To say that speed isn't the only thing that makes a great racer is merely true, and vexingly banal being a known truth to us all and so not worthy of being uttered to a community of one's peers. But to act like speed isn't a primary component, amounting almost to a majority of what is required is disingenuous. Trying to elevate Button (and current Kimi, too) to the status of the f1 triumvirate does him a disservice.
To unnerve Vettel you have to be able to do two things consistently and have the second one follow off the first: Be able to outqualify him or near him, and be able to snatch a victory from him on equal ground or put him in the shade on equal ground (sorry Mark but that disqualifies you well... off the Mark! ooh how it tickles me when a pun falls in my lap). A race like Korea shows how useless a Webber not on one of his pet tracks can be at parlaying a qualifying advantage (albeit a slim one) into a race advantage over his teammate. He ends up 8 seconds behind Vettel there from pole whereas Vettel puts him 13 behind in India in a contrasting position. Deep down Vettel and we all know that Hamilton is pretty much the only one on the grid that Vettel can put in a good lap against in qualifying and still be beaten for pole and vice versa. And if Singapore had played itself out to the end without the retirement I think we would have seen Hamilton maintain his lead on Vettel to the flag, an eventuality very suggestive to interpretation when brought together with what did actually happen in Austin. Again and again over the years we have seen Hamilton gain a distinct type of win over the Red Bulls. I guess you could call it a win for bragging rights or a calling card win, a species that intrinsically has nothing perhaps to recommend itself but one that does I think carry psychological consequences. A species that Button is peculiarly lacking in.
Almost all of Button's wins seem like the consequence of keeping his nose clean from some general dust up or brouhaha that incapacitates the greater part of the grid and never of a forcible wresting of victory from his rivals haply with the inclusion of an on track pass. Something is terribly wrong when the guy has driven a front running car for three years and had his first dry win in Spa. His specialty isn't even in wet driving per se but at 'tweenng', my word for tip toeing slicks on wet road till the track gets too wet not to switch to inters at which the true wet drivers assert themselves.
We think of Vettel as basically a qualifying and pole to flag monster. But the pressure of delivering against Hamilton in Q seemed to have him faltering at Singapore when he had shined in all the run-up sessions. A pole to flag triumph was foiled at Canada and Austin. In Germany 2011 Hamilton basically rained on the homecoming and hopeful home-win of the new champion. In China 2011 he again won a close quarters contest with Vettel. Meanwhile for Button, Brazil 2012 was a wash as far as the possibility of some meaningful competition with Vettel was concerned. In Belgium, Vettel didn't make q3 and so was too far away for them to come into competitive conflict. In Australia the performance difference between the McLaren and the Red Bull decided things too much at that stage in the game. In Japan 2011, however much losing out came to rankle Vettel (going by his admission in the press lead-up to the 2012 race he had already all but sewn up the championship (only needed a point I believe) which changed the nature of his driving. In Singapore 2012 I thought we were provided with a little-remembered situation from which to judge of Button's mettle in contesting things with Vettel. After Hamilton's retirement Button got to where he was basically breathing down Vettel's neck and then, whether it was through a failure of desire and derring-do as I incline to think, or some less damning reason more sympathetic spectators would care to supply he basically gave up the chase and resigned himself to second. Even when others win a grand prix in which Vettel happened to participate rarely are the narratives of those races as personal in the nature of their competitive involvement with Vettel as they are with a fair many of Hamilton's. And strange enough while the championship was touted as a contest between Vettel and Alonso, which it literally was, they too had little meaningful competition on track this year. They could have almost been racing at different tracks, so compartmentalized from each others' were their races at each venue—a lot of this being due to the performance gap of the cars. Perez in Malaysia alone had more significant on track competition with Alonso then Vettel dd. Now the thing I'm talking about is an affair of very tenuous sensations and perceptions but I can't help but delude myself that certain other people harbor a similar take on events and would welcome their contributions of opinion. I think when historians look back on this era of f1 and try to characterize the nature of the contest, and the players, Hamilton will play a more considerable role than he currently does though if he never sees his way through his coming Mercedes years to the holding of another championship it may only be the role of inspired occasional foil (note how I didn't say occasional inspired foil).


To conclude with my dressing down of a certain someone: When people ask Ashley to enumerate the driving errors that Hamilton made during the 2012 season he offers none but opts for some general comment to the effect of 'well everyone had misfortunes befall them etc. etc. but some persons 'namely my boy, wink wink' get the job done anyway'--a bald evasion. He then tries to diffuse the opposition he had provoked in making the extent of some of his true feelings clearer earlier by finally centering his reservations with Hamilton on an area that is strictly outside of his functions as a driver. To finally have to rest his criticism of Hamilton on a calling into-question of his administrative capacities is a duck and a defeat.

tl;dr

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
Johnston wrote:
SchumieRules wrote:
breathemyexhaust wrote:
long long post


I hate to break it to you, Ashley is a lady, not a dude.

Thought you should know.



Girl yes, Lady debatable :P

Lady makes me feel old. Apparently someone is under the impression that I wanted you all to think I am Jochen Rindt though.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 6:41 pm
Posts: 6587
pokerman wrote:
Johnston wrote:
pokerman wrote:
You do realise that if Hulkenburg had not crashed Hamilton out of the race in Brazil he would have finished 3rd in the WDC?

The 4 races you mention as casual run of the mill retirements/problems cost him 3 wins, the above incident maybe another win, then throw in another 2 races being crashed out by opponents, 2 races driving the entire race with defective components in the rear of his car, and a race ending puncture. Thats 9 races in a 20 race schedule, i think that would seriously impact anyones chances of winning the WDC.

Perhaps you should point out where Hamilton was responsible also all the races where the Mclaren was the fastest car?

Its also interesting to note how the teams dealt with the qualifying disqualifications, McLaren put Hamilton on an almost impossible one stop strategy against the 2 stop strategies whilst Red Bull were far more inventive with their approach which yielded a much better result, was this of Vettel's own doing?


And if Grosjean hadn't have hit Alonso in Spa Alonso would be WDC.

Vets strategy was a gamble that paid off because of safety cars. The same result in Spain could not have been guaranteed.

Also due to the way Red Bull and McLaren differ in their approaches like final gear ratios, quali pace Vs Race Pace it was more beneficial for Red Bull than the McLaren in the first place.

The McLaren still probably has a compromised race set up, interesting how one misfortune for Alonso can write off all of Hamilton's misfortunes?


Yes but not as much as RBR . RBR have a distinct disadvantage when it comes to coming through the pack (Seb especially) because of choice of final gear ratio. It's usually one of the slowest through the traps. By increasing that gearing in Parc Ferme it gave him a better chance at overtaking.

McLaren on the other hand set a higher ratio as default. So by pulling Hamilton out to change the final gear and start from the Pit lane would have given less benefit.

Plus you are failing to pull in circuit design into the mix. Just because it worked at one type of track does not mean it will work at another. Increasing the gear ratios affect acceleration With a tighter twistier track like Barca increasing the ratios especially with a full load on could have actually hurt Hammy. Then of course the length of the straights also is a factor IIRC Yas Marina has one of the longest of the season. Giving Hammy longer ratios could have meant his acceleration hampered enough to hurt through the twisty bits AND start to run out of straight before he topped out.

Thats before you take in how much safety cars or lack of and other peoples incidents influenced the result.

In short it's not quite as black and white as it worked with that car there it would work with the other car here due to a number of factors Inc how the car is set up to begin with and the nature of the track they are on.

And I didn't say anything wiped out anything. It's all coulda woulda shoulda.

http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-the-but ... effect.htm

_________________
Disclaimer: The above post maybe tongue in cheek.

"I thought I'd get your theories, mock them, then embrace my own. The usual."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 11:00 pm
Posts: 2986
lamo wrote:
M.Nader -DODZ- wrote:
POBRatings wrote:
M Nader asked how would JB and KR do against Vettel.
Interesting one, because in some ways Jenson and Kimi are similar drivers, very sensitive to chassis balance and sometimes being too smooth to warm their tyres.

I think Vettel would beat them both in same-cars.

JB is not as fast as Lewis, and I don't reckon Kimi would be quite as fast as Seb,Lewis, or Fred. Kimi's two year break surely could not quite match him to the other three who have been going at the top all the time?

KR should be faster in 2013 if his car /team are sound. Was the Lotus-Renault really fast in 2012, or was it the two drivers?
KR against JB in same cars? Would be a good one. Posters views?


I respectfully disagree, I agree that Kimi, Button and Alonso are not as fast as Lewis or Vettel.

But over a season i would put my money on the former 3 against the latter 2. i would say Button, Alonso and Kimi are race specialists while Lewis and Seb are quali specialists.


You don't have to play what if with two of those pairings have already happened ..

Lewis 2-1 Jenson
Lewis 1-0 Fernando.

Both opposite to your prediction, everybodies entitled to an opinion.


True, but this shows that Jenson did beat Lewis in one season and was very close in another (points wise). and Lewis and Fernando finished with the same points so saying Lewis won it is not entirely true (although technically it is).

Coulthard beat Hakkinen a couple of times but when it came to a WDC Hak. always ended on top.

would you say that Alonso, Button and Kimi have 0 chance to be WDC if partnered with either Lewis or Vettel? i would say they have about 55-60% chance of beating their teammates. i bet you have that 60% in the opposite direction, opinions :)

i would also change that % depending on the regulations.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 3936
Driver A - 2 DNFs
Driver B - 6 DNFs
Driver B - 2 mechanical issues not resulting in DNFs

Both A & B demoted to last place once.

Driver B one other grid penalty. Driver A no other grid penalties.

Driver A - 3/20 races
(2 alternator failures, 1 grid demotion)

Driver B - 10/20 races
(3 mechanical DNFs, 3 collision DNFs, 2 grid penalties, 2 race long mechanical issues)

Luck levelled out over the season?

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 6:41 pm
Posts: 6587
Driver B obviously Slept with Lady Lucks boyfriend or had his team principal sabotaging his car in a conspiracy involving his team mate.

_________________
Disclaimer: The above post maybe tongue in cheek.

"I thought I'd get your theories, mock them, then embrace my own. The usual."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 3936
M.Nader -DODZ- wrote:
lamo wrote:
M.Nader -DODZ- wrote:
POBRatings wrote:
M Nader asked how would JB and KR do against Vettel.
Interesting one, because in some ways Jenson and Kimi are similar drivers, very sensitive to chassis balance and sometimes being too smooth to warm their tyres.

I think Vettel would beat them both in same-cars.

JB is not as fast as Lewis, and I don't reckon Kimi would be quite as fast as Seb,Lewis, or Fred. Kimi's two year break surely could not quite match him to the other three who have been going at the top all the time?

KR should be faster in 2013 if his car /team are sound. Was the Lotus-Renault really fast in 2012, or was it the two drivers?
KR against JB in same cars? Would be a good one. Posters views?


I respectfully disagree, I agree that Kimi, Button and Alonso are not as fast as Lewis or Vettel.

But over a season i would put my money on the former 3 against the latter 2. i would say Button, Alonso and Kimi are race specialists while Lewis and Seb are quali specialists.


You don't have to play what if with two of those pairings have already happened ..

Lewis 2-1 Jenson
Lewis 1-0 Fernando.

Both opposite to your prediction, everybodies entitled to an opinion.


True, but this shows that Jenson did beat Lewis in one season and was very close in another (points wise). and Lewis and Fernando finished with the same points so saying Lewis won it is not entirely true (although technically it is).

Coulthard beat Hakkinen a couple of times but when it came to a WDC Hak. always ended on top.

would you say that Alonso, Button and Kimi have 0 chance to be WDC if partnered with either Lewis or Vettel? i would say they have about 55-60% chance of beating their teammates. i bet you have that 60% in the opposite direction, opinions :)

i would also change that % depending on the regulations.


In the other direction would be supported by what has occurred.

With 2007, from Monaco onwards (after Monaco-gate) Lewis had quite an advantage, although I think Mclaren might have screwed Alonso in the latter part of the season. From Monaco Lewis had 6 poles, 4 wins. Alonso 1 win, 1 pole.

You could argue the team favoured Lewis so Alonso slowed down or Lewis had found his feet after the first 6 races and is/was slightly better than Alonso.

To answer your question, provided reliability was equal;
Alonso - Hamilton 50/50
Button - Hamilton 20/80
Raikkonen - Hamilton 20/80
Vettel - Hamilton 50/50

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:00 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 6:29 pm
Posts: 4823
Location: u.k
lamo wrote:
M.Nader -DODZ- wrote:
lamo wrote:
M.Nader -DODZ- wrote:
POBRatings wrote:
M Nader asked how would JB and KR do against Vettel.
Interesting one, because in some ways Jenson and Kimi are similar drivers, very sensitive to chassis balance and sometimes being too smooth to warm their tyres.

I think Vettel would beat them both in same-cars.

JB is not as fast as Lewis, and I don't reckon Kimi would be quite as fast as Seb,Lewis, or Fred. Kimi's two year break surely could not quite match him to the other three who have been going at the top all the time?

KR should be faster in 2013 if his car /team are sound. Was the Lotus-Renault really fast in 2012, or was it the two drivers?
KR against JB in same cars? Would be a good one. Posters views?


I respectfully disagree, I agree that Kimi, Button and Alonso are not as fast as Lewis or Vettel.

But over a season i would put my money on the former 3 against the latter 2. i would say Button, Alonso and Kimi are race specialists while Lewis and Seb are quali specialists.


You don't have to play what if with two of those pairings have already happened ..

Lewis 2-1 Jenson
Lewis 1-0 Fernando.

Both opposite to your prediction, everybodies entitled to an opinion.


True, but this shows that Jenson did beat Lewis in one season and was very close in another (points wise). and Lewis and Fernando finished with the same points so saying Lewis won it is not entirely true (although technically it is).

Coulthard beat Hakkinen a couple of times but when it came to a WDC Hak. always ended on top.

would you say that Alonso, Button and Kimi have 0 chance to be WDC if partnered with either Lewis or Vettel? i would say they have about 55-60% chance of beating their teammates. i bet you have that 60% in the opposite direction, opinions :)

i would also change that % depending on the regulations.


In the other direction would be supported by what has occurred.

With 2007, from Monaco onwards (after Monaco-gate) Lewis had quite an advantage, although I think Mclaren might have screwed Alonso in the latter part of the season. From Monaco Lewis had 6 poles, 4 wins. Alonso 1 win, 1 pole.

You could argue the team favoured Lewis so Alonso slowed down or Lewis had found his feet after the first 6 races and is/was slightly better than Alonso.

To answer your question, provided reliability was equal;
Alonso - Hamilton 50/50
Button - Hamilton 20/80
Raikkonen - Hamilton 20/80
Vettel - Hamilton 50/50


Monaco was Alonso's second win out of 4. The 4 being Malaysia, Monaco, Nurburg and Monza. I'm not sure about poles off the top off my head.

_________________
Formula Mercedes

Forza Alonso


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:09 pm
Posts: 3936
Indeed, Alonso started very well but from Monaco onwards after Lewis' outburst over status their relative pace changed somewhat. Highlighted in race results and qualifying. Overall front row starts is is equal 12-11, but Alonso dominated Hamilton in the first 5 races then Lewis had the upper hand all season.

Qualifying.

Alonso:
First 8 races, Alonso on the front row in 7/8
Last 10 races, Alonso on the front row 4/10

Hamilton
First 8 races, Hamilton on the front row in 4/8
Last 10 races, Alonso on the front row 8/10

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 7488
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
No one would be able to beat Vettel in a Red Bull, the Red Bull is designed for Vettel, or rather Vettel has learned to drive the car to exploit the unusual characteristics of Adrian Newey's design philosophy. It would take Alonso and Hamilton, too long to catch up. This is the reason why Webber was equal with Vettel at the beginning of the season, because Red Bull could not get their rear end to work as they wanted it to resulting in a more normal handling car. Once they sorted out the problems Vettel could drive it in the way that Newey had envisaged it.

It's very similar to the Mansell/Patrese '92 season; Mansell trusted the active suspension to work how Newey had said it would whereas Patrese did not. The 2011 car was very similar when the exhaust blowing was at its most advanced, and that's why Vettel dominated Webber. At the beginning of 2012 the Red Bull's system was not working so it behaved like a traditional F1 car. At the end of 2012 it was working again (although not to the same extremes of 2011).

I think that Hamilton would probably learn how to use it better than Alonso would, being the more adaptable driver, and Alonso would be able to deal with psychological pressure of being up against Vettel better and apply more pressure back, however neither driver would be able to beat him.

Just because Webber can't drive such a car is no proof that others couldn't, in particular both Hamilton and Alonso

I never said that Hamilton and Alonso wouldn't be able to, in fact, I said they probably would be able to.

But saying they wouldn't be able to beat him is almost the same i would think?

No. Webber started driving the current iteration of the Red Bull design at the same time as Vettel when it was introduced in 2009. Vettel would have a 4 year advantage in understanding the car, which as I said in both my previous posts has a counter intuitive way of extracting the most from it, over Hamilton or Alonso if they joined him.

Agreed he would have a heads up but how much time does it take the likes of topliners like Alonso and Hamilton to get up to speed, Massa was at Ferrari for over 3 years but Alonso had him beat from the get go, i just don't believe it takes drivers like these that much time to get on top of what they need to be doing to extract the best from the car plus they also have Vettel's data to look at.

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 1st


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 7488
Johnston wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Johnston wrote:
pokerman wrote:
You do realise that if Hulkenburg had not crashed Hamilton out of the race in Brazil he would have finished 3rd in the WDC?

The 4 races you mention as casual run of the mill retirements/problems cost him 3 wins, the above incident maybe another win, then throw in another 2 races being crashed out by opponents, 2 races driving the entire race with defective components in the rear of his car, and a race ending puncture. Thats 9 races in a 20 race schedule, i think that would seriously impact anyones chances of winning the WDC.

Perhaps you should point out where Hamilton was responsible also all the races where the Mclaren was the fastest car?

Its also interesting to note how the teams dealt with the qualifying disqualifications, McLaren put Hamilton on an almost impossible one stop strategy against the 2 stop strategies whilst Red Bull were far more inventive with their approach which yielded a much better result, was this of Vettel's own doing?


And if Grosjean hadn't have hit Alonso in Spa Alonso would be WDC.

Vets strategy was a gamble that paid off because of safety cars. The same result in Spain could not have been guaranteed.

Also due to the way Red Bull and McLaren differ in their approaches like final gear ratios, quali pace Vs Race Pace it was more beneficial for Red Bull than the McLaren in the first place.

The McLaren still probably has a compromised race set up, interesting how one misfortune for Alonso can write off all of Hamilton's misfortunes?


Yes but not as much as RBR . RBR have a distinct disadvantage when it comes to coming through the pack (Seb especially) because of choice of final gear ratio. It's usually one of the slowest through the traps. By increasing that gearing in Parc Ferme it gave him a better chance at overtaking.

McLaren on the other hand set a higher ratio as default. So by pulling Hamilton out to change the final gear and start from the Pit lane would have given less benefit.

Plus you are failing to pull in circuit design into the mix. Just because it worked at one type of track does not mean it will work at another. Increasing the gear ratios affect acceleration With a tighter twistier track like Barca increasing the ratios especially with a full load on could have actually hurt Hammy. Then of course the length of the straights also is a factor IIRC Yas Marina has one of the longest of the season. Giving Hammy longer ratios could have meant his acceleration hampered enough to hurt through the twisty bits AND start to run out of straight before he topped out.

Thats before you take in how much safety cars or lack of and other peoples incidents influenced the result.

In short it's not quite as black and white as it worked with that car there it would work with the other car here due to a number of factors Inc how the car is set up to begin with and the nature of the track they are on.

And I didn't say anything wiped out anything. It's all coulda woulda shoulda.

http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-the-but ... effect.htm

I understand what you're saying i'm just thinking would it have even entered McLaren's head to do that?

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 1st


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 6:41 pm
Posts: 6587
Who knows. It's a bit like asking did Red bull ever think about giving webber agrid drop to help Seb.

Even if it did think about it whether they would do it. Remember Whitmarsh making comments about their Sponsors not liking them flying so close to the wind on Regs?

Can't remember his exact words but I got the impression that they need to be whiter than white these days.

_________________
Disclaimer: The above post maybe tongue in cheek.

"I thought I'd get your theories, mock them, then embrace my own. The usual."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 3966
Johnston wrote:
Who knows. It's a bit like asking did Red bull ever think about giving webber agrid drop to help Seb.

Even if it did think about it whether they would do it. Remember Whitmarsh making comments about their Sponsors not liking them flying so close to the wind on Regs?

Can't remember his exact words but I got the impression that they need to be whiter than white these days.


That's an interesting point about the sponsors, I wonder if the Ferrari sponsors ever made a fuss over the Massa penalty

_________________
ΜΣ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 502
lamo wrote:
M.Nader -DODZ- wrote:
lamo wrote:
M.Nader -DODZ- wrote:
POBRatings wrote:
M Nader asked how would JB and KR do against Vettel.
Interesting one, because in some ways Jenson and Kimi are similar drivers, very sensitive to chassis balance and sometimes being too smooth to warm their tyres.

I think Vettel would beat them both in same-cars.

JB is not as fast as Lewis, and I don't reckon Kimi would be quite as fast as Seb,Lewis, or Fred. Kimi's two year break surely could not quite match him to the other three who have been going at the top all the time?

KR should be faster in 2013 if his car /team are sound. Was the Lotus-Renault really fast in 2012, or was it the two drivers?
KR against JB in same cars? Would be a good one. Posters views?


I respectfully disagree, I agree that Kimi, Button and Alonso are not as fast as Lewis or Vettel.

But over a season i would put my money on the former 3 against the latter 2. i would say Button, Alonso and Kimi are race specialists while Lewis and Seb are quali specialists.


You don't have to play what if with two of those pairings have already happened ..

Lewis 2-1 Jenson
Lewis 1-0 Fernando.

Both opposite to your prediction, everybodies entitled to an opinion.


True, but this shows that Jenson did beat Lewis in one season and was very close in another (points wise). and Lewis and Fernando finished with the same points so saying Lewis won it is not entirely true (although technically it is).

Coulthard beat Hakkinen a couple of times but when it came to a WDC Hak. always ended on top.

would you say that Alonso, Button and Kimi have 0 chance to be WDC if partnered with either Lewis or Vettel? i would say they have about 55-60% chance of beating their teammates. i bet you have that 60% in the opposite direction, opinions :)

i would also change that % depending on the regulations.


In the other direction would be supported by what has occurred.

With 2007, from Monaco onwards (after Monaco-gate) Lewis had quite an advantage, although I think Mclaren might have screwed Alonso in the latter part of the season. From Monaco Lewis had 6 poles, 4 wins. Alonso 1 win, 1 pole.

You could argue the team favoured Lewis so Alonso slowed down or Lewis had found his feet after the first 6 races and is/was slightly better than Alonso.

To answer your question, provided reliability was equal;
Alonso - Hamilton 50/50
Button - Hamilton 20/80
Raikkonen - Hamilton 20/80
Vettel - Hamilton 50/50


By the same logic you could split the season in Three parts and take a look at who finished the season best. Alonso probably had the worst part of his career right there in the middle of 2007 while Lewis had his best.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
Would it have entered their mind to pull the car and make setup changes? Of course it would. They are in sorry shape if that didnt occur to anyone there :lol: There are plenty of good reasons not to do it though, beginning with their data probably showing not significant advantage, or a lack of data instilling enough fear to play it safe.

I don't know why sponsors would care if they chose to start from the pit lane - its clearly within the rules and is an option to all of the teams at any time. To me its not even one of those things that is permissible within the rules but leaves a bad taste in your mouth as it comes with a major disadvantage, and neither penalizes, or changes the race for, anyone else.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 7488
M.Nader -DODZ- wrote:
lamo wrote:
M.Nader -DODZ- wrote:
POBRatings wrote:
M Nader asked how would JB and KR do against Vettel.
Interesting one, because in some ways Jenson and Kimi are similar drivers, very sensitive to chassis balance and sometimes being too smooth to warm their tyres.

I think Vettel would beat them both in same-cars.

JB is not as fast as Lewis, and I don't reckon Kimi would be quite as fast as Seb,Lewis, or Fred. Kimi's two year break surely could not quite match him to the other three who have been going at the top all the time?

KR should be faster in 2013 if his car /team are sound. Was the Lotus-Renault really fast in 2012, or was it the two drivers?
KR against JB in same cars? Would be a good one. Posters views?


I respectfully disagree, I agree that Kimi, Button and Alonso are not as fast as Lewis or Vettel.

But over a season i would put my money on the former 3 against the latter 2. i would say Button, Alonso and Kimi are race specialists while Lewis and Seb are quali specialists.


You don't have to play what if with two of those pairings have already happened ..

Lewis 2-1 Jenson
Lewis 1-0 Fernando.

Both opposite to your prediction, everybodies entitled to an opinion.


True, but this shows that Jenson did beat Lewis in one season and was very close in another (points wise). and Lewis and Fernando finished with the same points so saying Lewis won it is not entirely true (although technically it is).

Coulthard beat Hakkinen a couple of times but when it came to a WDC Hak. always ended on top.

would you say that Alonso, Button and Kimi have 0 chance to be WDC if partnered with either Lewis or Vettel? i would say they have about 55-60% chance of beating their teammates. i bet you have that 60% in the opposite direction, opinions :)

i would also change that % depending on the regulations.

Well you're obviously not basing your %'s going on past histories

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 1st


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 7488
lamo wrote:
M.Nader -DODZ- wrote:
lamo wrote:
M.Nader -DODZ- wrote:
POBRatings wrote:
M Nader asked how would JB and KR do against Vettel.
Interesting one, because in some ways Jenson and Kimi are similar drivers, very sensitive to chassis balance and sometimes being too smooth to warm their tyres.

I think Vettel would beat them both in same-cars.

JB is not as fast as Lewis, and I don't reckon Kimi would be quite as fast as Seb,Lewis, or Fred. Kimi's two year break surely could not quite match him to the other three who have been going at the top all the time?

KR should be faster in 2013 if his car /team are sound. Was the Lotus-Renault really fast in 2012, or was it the two drivers?
KR against JB in same cars? Would be a good one. Posters views?


I respectfully disagree, I agree that Kimi, Button and Alonso are not as fast as Lewis or Vettel.

But over a season i would put my money on the former 3 against the latter 2. i would say Button, Alonso and Kimi are race specialists while Lewis and Seb are quali specialists.


You don't have to play what if with two of those pairings have already happened ..

Lewis 2-1 Jenson
Lewis 1-0 Fernando.

Both opposite to your prediction, everybodies entitled to an opinion.


True, but this shows that Jenson did beat Lewis in one season and was very close in another (points wise). and Lewis and Fernando finished with the same points so saying Lewis won it is not entirely true (although technically it is).

Coulthard beat Hakkinen a couple of times but when it came to a WDC Hak. always ended on top.

would you say that Alonso, Button and Kimi have 0 chance to be WDC if partnered with either Lewis or Vettel? i would say they have about 55-60% chance of beating their teammates. i bet you have that 60% in the opposite direction, opinions :)

i would also change that % depending on the regulations.


In the other direction would be supported by what has occurred.

With 2007, from Monaco onwards (after Monaco-gate) Lewis had quite an advantage, although I think Mclaren might have screwed Alonso in the latter part of the season. From Monaco Lewis had 6 poles, 4 wins. Alonso 1 win, 1 pole.

You could argue the team favoured Lewis so Alonso slowed down or Lewis had found his feet after the first 6 races and is/was slightly better than Alonso.

To answer your question, provided reliability was equal;
Alonso - Hamilton 50/50
Button - Hamilton 20/80
Raikkonen - Hamilton 20/80
Vettel - Hamilton 50/50

I would say thats not too far out

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 1st


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 7488
Johnston wrote:
Who knows. It's a bit like asking did Red bull ever think about giving webber agrid drop to help Seb.

Even if it did think about it whether they would do it. Remember Whitmarsh making comments about their Sponsors not liking them flying so close to the wind on Regs?

Can't remember his exact words but I got the impression that they need to be whiter than white these days.

I don't think Red Bull would even think about stooping that low

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 1st


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 7488
ashley313 wrote:
Would it have entered their mind to pull the car and make setup changes? Of course it would. They are in sorry shape if that didnt occur to anyone there :lol: There are plenty of good reasons not to do it though, beginning with their data probably showing not significant advantage, or a lack of data instilling enough fear to play it safe.

I don't know why sponsors would care if they chose to start from the pit lane - its clearly within the rules and is an option to all of the teams at any time. To me its not even one of those things that is permissible within the rules but leaves a bad taste in your mouth as it comes with a major disadvantage, and neither penalizes, or changes the race for, anyone else.

Given McLaren i dare say it was more of a choice of playing it safe then

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 1st


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 8:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
I'm sure Red Bull thought about it, all tactical advantages within the rules must be considered, but Mark would probably break something and moving Alonso further up the grid would be foolish. Safe with the knowledge that it likely wouldn't help you, you can then act like its beneath you.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 9:28 am
Posts: 134
I think in 2011 Button could have challenged him because the RB7 suited his style.

In 2012 Lewis's form and his ability could not be questioned.

Fernando wouldnt have won either imho because he cracks under team mate pressure.

We don't know if Vettel would crack because he is favoured and Webber seems 'past it'.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 10:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:56 pm
Posts: 379
Vettels fans vs Hamilton fans vs Alonso fans and add a bit of Kimi and Buttons fans.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :thumbup:

_________________
Image


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: Atomicunderware, Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], LKS1, Mr-E, RunningMan, shoot999, SWAN, UnlikeUday 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