planetf1.com

It is currently Thu Oct 18, 2018 6:40 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2018 10:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5904
Location: Michigan, USA
Xink wrote:
Ferrari would have done exactly the same today if roles were reversed.
Hamilton finally gets some clear assistance from a team-mate to move closer to winning the WDC and the internet goes into meltdown

This is what I was talking about. Before it was 'Hamilton is better because he doesn't get team orders'. Now it's suddenly become 'everyone else does it'. Where's the consistency? If you were bothered by Ferrari doing it, you should be bothered by Mercedes doing it. Anything else is just blatant hypocrisy.

_________________
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 Sep 30, 2018 10:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6381
Location: Nebraska, USA
sandman1347 wrote:
Blake wrote:
Clarky wrote:
Quote:
@WillDale956
LewisHamilton has now claimed as many #F1 wins from 2014-2018 as @schumacher did during his peak Ferrari title-winning years of 2000-2004: 48 wins.


There are more races per season.

There are also 2 years with a defacto #2 teammate vs all 5 for Michael with a 100% #2 teammate...


:lol:

So predictable. As I have stated many times previously, I don't have much of a problem with team orders, so this doesn't bother me. Actually there is a degree of relief, as finally we can put to rest the "only Ferrari" faction on team orders. Oh, and yes, I know that there will be a vigorous defense of how Michael won all of his WDCs because of #1 status and team orders as opposed to Lewis not having had that advantage... there always is.

However, to put things simply: the post I responded to was touting that Lewis has now won as many races from 2014-2018 as Schumi did from 2000-2004, I simply stated that there are more races per year now than there were then, a legitimate factor. Secondly, while Schumi did, at times, benefit from some team orders, there is no denying that so too has Lewis. Both are facts.

ciao.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2018 10:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6381
Location: Nebraska, USA
Exediron wrote:
Xink wrote:
Ferrari would have done exactly the same today if roles were reversed.
Hamilton finally gets some clear assistance from a team-mate to move closer to winning the WDC and the internet goes into meltdown

This is what I was talking about. Before it was 'Hamilton is better because he doesn't get team orders'. Now it's suddenly become 'everyone else does it'. Where's the consistency? If you were bothered by Ferrari doing it, you should be bothered by Mercedes doing it. Anything else is just blatant hypocrisy.


:thumbup:

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 5:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14181
Blake wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Blake wrote:
Clarky wrote:
Quote:
@WillDale956
LewisHamilton has now claimed as many #F1 wins from 2014-2018 as @schumacher did during his peak Ferrari title-winning years of 2000-2004: 48 wins.


There are more races per season.

There are also 2 years with a defacto #2 teammate vs all 5 for Michael with a 100% #2 teammate...


:lol:

So predictable. As I have stated many times previously, I don't have much of a problem with team orders, so this doesn't bother me. Actually there is a degree of relief, as finally we can put to rest the "only Ferrari" faction on team orders. Oh, and yes, I know that there will be a vigorous defense of how Michael won all of his WDCs because of #1 status and team orders as opposed to Lewis not having had that advantage... there always is.

However, to put things simply: the post I responded to was touting that Lewis has now won as many races from 2014-2018 as Schumi did from 2000-2004, I simply stated that there are more races per year now than there were then, a legitimate factor. Secondly, while Schumi did, at times, benefit from some team orders, there is no denying that so too has Lewis. Both are facts.

ciao.


You mentioned one factor effecting the number of wins, you can hardly complain or mock people if they mention another.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 6:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6381
Location: Nebraska, USA
Actually, mikey, I responded to a factor that was already posted. The fact that sandman came in to post about his version of a Schumi advantage was supplemental to the discussion and was based on merely on his opinion not irrefutable fact in the way he described it.

My intent originally was to point out that win totals over a specific period of time are tilted if the periods do not have the same amount of races... I did not "mock" the original post that I responded to, but only pointed out the difference in race frquency... Nothing more. I fail to see how I have been unfair in this.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Last edited by Blake on Mon Oct 01, 2018 7:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 6:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 7:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2958
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.


That theory would make the Redbul the quickest car as Hamilton couldnt get past on much fresher tyres. You need to be significantly faster to even make an attempt, some circuits it can be upto 2 seconds, Vettel made a mistake and had no battery left, that's why Hamilton got the chance on Vettel, if Bottas makes the same mistakes then Vettel likely makes an attempt.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

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


Last edited by F1_Ernie on Mon Oct 01, 2018 7:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 7:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.


That theory would make the Redbul the quickest car as Hamilton couldnt get past on much fresher tyres. You need to be remotely faster to even make an attempt, some circuits it can be upto 2 seconds, Vettel made a mistake and had no battery left, that's why Hamilton got the chance on Vettel, if Bottas makes the same mistakes then Vettel likely makes an attempt.

Hamilton didn't need to get past Verstappen, as Verstappen still had to pit. Why risk anything unnecessarily?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 7:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 839
Location: UK
Just a comment on Team orders, I know many on here support them but there are also many that don't think they are in the spirit of sport, (note I didn't say this sport). Whatever your stance it is very clear that they are imposed with implication for the morale for the team. Bottas was gutted and confused, Hamilton simply didn't celebrate and clearly felt they were points he rather not have and Toto Wolff's justification showed it went against the grain.
Other teams may be more at ease with team orders but I'm not sure Mercedes are.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 7:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2958
Zoue wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.


That theory would make the Redbul the quickest car as Hamilton couldnt get past on much fresher tyres. You need to be remotely faster to even make an attempt, some circuits it can be upto 2 seconds, Vettel made a mistake and had no battery left, that's why Hamilton got the chance on Vettel, if Bottas makes the same mistakes then Vettel likely makes an attempt.

Hamilton didn't need to get past Verstappen, as Verstappen still had to pit. Why risk anything unnecessarily?


The car behind still needs to be significantly faster to even attempt an overtake specially in close cars at the front unless something else happens like tyres or mistakes specially on a circuit like Sochi. Using Vettel not making an attempt on Bottas as evidence doesn't really prove anything in today's F1, Vettel himself said sector 3 was rubbish for dirty air. The only reason Hamilton makes an attempt is the mistake by Vettel and running out of battery putting in his fast laps to undercut Hamilton. There's no doubt Mercedes was quicker but I just don't believe in using what you describe as evidence. Bottas makes the same mistake and no battery and Vettel makes an attempt.

_________________
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: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:23 am
Posts: 2631
Exediron wrote:
Xink wrote:
Ferrari would have done exactly the same today if roles were reversed.
Hamilton finally gets some clear assistance from a team-mate to move closer to winning the WDC and the internet goes into meltdown

This is what I was talking about. Before it was 'Hamilton is better because he doesn't get team orders'. Now it's suddenly become 'everyone else does it'. Where's the consistency? If you were bothered by Ferrari doing it, you should be bothered by Mercedes doing it. Anything else is just blatant hypocrisy.


Interesting. I came to the same conclusion. But in my case I looked at the previous comments on team orders by those most bothered about Mercedes doing it. Seems those bothered by Mercedes team orders were not so bothered by past Ferrari ones. Blatant hypocrisy?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 634
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.


I dont understand the logic? The overtaking delta was 0.8+ here, Hamilton was never going to pass Bottas. Unless he made an error. The one time Hamilton got anywhere near him was due to traffic.

Unless we are saying Bottas was really slow in the first stint and holding Hamilton up - you don’t undercut another car when significantly slower.


Last edited by Johnson on Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2958
I don't care who uses team orders, like Vettel said it's a "no brainer", i just dont understand how everyone is overreacting, what if these points do make a difference at the end of season? You need to get the title wrapped up asap. Makes me laugh how some people seem to forget Kimi's race gets sacrificed at any point of the season, mostly due to him not having the speed to contend with the top drivers though, like Bottas who doesn't have the speed and consistently to content for the title, get yourself in a position for the title and you won't need to pull over.

_________________
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: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1884
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.


Hamilton didn't have the delta to get it done and it never should have happened, but it did. Vettel made a small error and Lewis maximised in possibly the only moments where he reasonably could of done when the tyres were at their very best. Vettel was also on fresh tyres and really didn't have a good excuse in my view. Of course though, Hamilton was going to go like hell after Vettel and not Bottas, though would have likely failed to pass Vettel had he not got the job done in the phase that he did. Very impressive from Lewis.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
shoot999 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Xink wrote:
Ferrari would have done exactly the same today if roles were reversed.
Hamilton finally gets some clear assistance from a team-mate to move closer to winning the WDC and the internet goes into meltdown

This is what I was talking about. Before it was 'Hamilton is better because he doesn't get team orders'. Now it's suddenly become 'everyone else does it'. Where's the consistency? If you were bothered by Ferrari doing it, you should be bothered by Mercedes doing it. Anything else is just blatant hypocrisy.


Interesting. I came to the same conclusion. But in my case I looked at the previous comments on team orders by those most bothered about Mercedes doing it. Seems those bothered by Mercedes team orders were not so bothered by past Ferrari ones. Blatant hypocrisy?

Why the question mark? You’re basically agreeing with the previous post that only being unhappy when one team does it is blatant hypocrisy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1884
Johnson wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.


I dont understand the logic? The overtaking delta was 0.8+ here, Hamilton was never going to pass Bottas. Unless he made an error. The one time Hamilton got anywhere near him was due to traffic.

Unless we are saying Bottas was really slow in the first stint and holding Hamilton up - you don’t undercut another car when significantly slower.



Vettel said he also felt faster than Bottas through various phases of the race, indicating that he had similar performance. If he was slower on pure pace he only felt he was slightly slower and possibly better on tyres than Mercedes.

For whatever reasons, Bottas was struggling in the first stint for tyre wear compared to either Hamilton or Vettel. Perhaps his pace on the day wasn't so hot.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Johnson wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.


I dont understand the logic? The overtaking delta was 0.8+ here, Hamilton was never going to pass Bottas. Unless he made an error. The one time Hamilton got anywhere near him was due to traffic.

Unless we are saying Bottas was really slow in the first stint and holding Hamilton up - you don’t undercut another car when significantly slower.

What don’t you understand? He was harrying Vettel because his car was quicker, but didn’t do the same with Bottas because it wasn’t. Seems simple enough logic to me


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1884
I hated the team orders even though I can understand them. It would have probably stayed as a Mercedes 1-3 had Hamilton not passed Vettel. Bottas had enough for the race win.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Invade wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.


I dont understand the logic? The overtaking delta was 0.8+ here, Hamilton was never going to pass Bottas. Unless he made an error. The one time Hamilton got anywhere near him was due to traffic.

Unless we are saying Bottas was really slow in the first stint and holding Hamilton up - you don’t undercut another car when significantly slower.



Vettel said he also felt faster than Bottas through various phases of the race, indicating that he had similar performance. If he was slower on pure pace he only felt he was slightly slower and possibly better on tyres than Mercedes.

For whatever reasons, Bottas was struggling in the first stint for tyre wear compared to either Hamilton or Vettel. Perhaps his pace on the day wasn't so hot.
wxcept Hamilton didn’t drop him after he was let by. More likely that he was just pacing himself, like they did in Singapore


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1884
Zoue wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.


I dont understand the logic? The overtaking delta was 0.8+ here, Hamilton was never going to pass Bottas. Unless he made an error. The one time Hamilton got anywhere near him was due to traffic.

Unless we are saying Bottas was really slow in the first stint and holding Hamilton up - you don’t undercut another car when significantly slower.

What don’t you understand? He was harrying Vettel because his car was quicker, but didn’t do the same with Bottas because it wasn’t. Seems simple enough logic to me


He was able to do it through hellbent racing, a Vettel error, and maximising an early window with the very fresh rubber. His work shouldn't be marginalised in my view. He mugged Vettel there with serious force and if Vettel could have held it together for say another 2 laps it might have been over.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1884
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.


I dont understand the logic? The overtaking delta was 0.8+ here, Hamilton was never going to pass Bottas. Unless he made an error. The one time Hamilton got anywhere near him was due to traffic.

Unless we are saying Bottas was really slow in the first stint and holding Hamilton up - you don’t undercut another car when significantly slower.



Vettel said he also felt faster than Bottas through various phases of the race, indicating that he had similar performance. If he was slower on pure pace he only felt he was slightly slower and possibly better on tyres than Mercedes.

For whatever reasons, Bottas was struggling in the first stint for tyre wear compared to either Hamilton or Vettel. Perhaps his pace on the day wasn't so hot.
wxcept Hamilton didn’t drop him after he was let by. More likely that he was just pacing himself, like they did in Singapore


Sure but Vettel wasn't going at his maximum either but windows for overtaking were very limited and almost non-existent - only possible with an error from the leading car in the duel. Slightly more possible I'd wager for a Merc on a Ferrari than the other way around, but not an outcome which could be reasonably expected either way. Apparantly it wasn't considered a serious option in the Merc situations or pre-race discussions.

In the end it was incredibly critical for Hamilton (even though he'd still have a good gap otherwise) as it was the diff between Bot P1 Ham P3 and Ham P1 Bot P2.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2958
Zoue wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.


I dont understand the logic? The overtaking delta was 0.8+ here, Hamilton was never going to pass Bottas. Unless he made an error. The one time Hamilton got anywhere near him was due to traffic.

Unless we are saying Bottas was really slow in the first stint and holding Hamilton up - you don’t undercut another car when significantly slower.

What don’t you understand? He was harrying Vettel because his car was quicker, but didn’t do the same with Bottas because it wasn’t. Seems simple enough logic to me


Bottas held up Vettel in sector 2 to allow Hamilton to get DRS, Vettel made a mistake in sector 3 which allowed Hamilton to get closer and I think Vettel lost DRS. Vettel had no battery left, don't just ignore all these factors. Hamilton wouldnt have overtaken Vettel without Bottas help, Hamilton wasn't a second quicker than Vettel like Hamilton wasn't a second quicker than Bottas and this is just to make an overtaking attempt, other factors came into play.

_________________
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: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1884
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.


I dont understand the logic? The overtaking delta was 0.8+ here, Hamilton was never going to pass Bottas. Unless he made an error. The one time Hamilton got anywhere near him was due to traffic.

Unless we are saying Bottas was really slow in the first stint and holding Hamilton up - you don’t undercut another car when significantly slower.

What don’t you understand? He was harrying Vettel because his car was quicker, but didn’t do the same with Bottas because it wasn’t. Seems simple enough logic to me


Bottas held up Vettel in sector 2 to allow Hamilton to get DRS, Vettel made a mistake in sector 3 which allowed Hamilton to get closer and I think Vettel lost DRS. Vettel had no battery left, don't just ignore all these factors. Hamilton wouldnt have overtaken Vettel without Bottas help, Hamilton wasn't a second quicker than Vettel like Hamilton wasn't a second quicker than Bottas and this is just to make an overtaking attempt, other factors came into play.


A perfect storm (and great teamwork).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 9:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 634
Invade wrote:

A perfect storm (and great teamwork).


Yes indeed, this has gone under the radar but Bottas did slow lap to hold up Vettel. The dirty air at this track seems like it was really bad this race. Overtaking nearly impossible unless you have a 1 second advantage. Vettels error not only lost him Bottas' DRS but allowed Hamilton to be closer than you ever could be under normal conditions going into the DRS zone. Small margins but another Vettel error essentially.

Bottas did a 40.2 on his slow lap where as 4 laps later he posted a 38.8. Bottas did such an amazing job yesterday in all aspects. I hope him wins a race later in the season and I think I would prefer it not to be a gift from Hamilton because that would cheapen it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 9:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1884
Johnson wrote:
Invade wrote:

A perfect storm (and great teamwork).


Yes indeed, this has gone under the radar but Bottas did slow lap to hold up Vettel. The dirty air at this track seems like it was really bad this race. Overtaking nearly impossible unless you have a 1 second advantage. Vettels error not only lost him Bottas' DRS but allowed Hamilton to be closer than you ever could be under normal conditions going into the DRS zone. Small margins but another Vettel error essentially.

Bottas did a 40.2 on his slow lap where as 4 laps later he posted a 38.8. Bottas did such an amazing job yesterday in all aspects. I hope him wins a race later in the season and I think I would prefer it not to be a gift from Hamilton because that would cheapen it.



Bottas agrees, as when he was asked whether he'd like a race to be given back to him his response was "Naw I think it's more fun if we race for it..."

... at the end.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14181
Blake wrote:
Actually, mikey, I responded to a factor that was already posted. The fact that sandman came in to post about his version of a Schumi advantage was supplemental to the discussion and was based on merely on his opinion not irrefutable fact in the way he described it.

My intent originally was to point out that win totals over a specific period of time are tilted if the periods do not have the same amount of races... I did not "mock" the original post that I responded to, but only pointed out the difference in race frquency... Nothing more. I fail to see how I have been unfair in this.


" :lol:

So predictable"

Not mocking?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5449
Blake wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Blake wrote:
Clarky wrote:
Quote:
@WillDale956
LewisHamilton has now claimed as many #F1 wins from 2014-2018 as @schumacher did during his peak Ferrari title-winning years of 2000-2004: 48 wins.


There are more races per season.

There are also 2 years with a defacto #2 teammate vs all 5 for Michael with a 100% #2 teammate...


:lol:

So predictable. As I have stated many times previously, I don't have much of a problem with team orders, so this doesn't bother me. Actually there is a degree of relief, as finally we can put to rest the "only Ferrari" faction on team orders. Oh, and yes, I know that there will be a vigorous defense of how Michael won all of his WDCs because of #1 status and team orders as opposed to Lewis not having had that advantage... there always is.

However, to put things simply: the post I responded to was touting that Lewis has now won as many races from 2014-2018 as Schumi did from 2000-2004, I simply stated that there are more races per year now than there were then, a legitimate factor. Secondly, while Schumi did, at times, benefit from some team orders, there is no denying that so too has Lewis. Both are facts.

ciao.

Sure but the fact is that Michael benefited from team orders from day 1 of every season with Ferrari; wheres Lewis didn't benefit from them much at all during the years where he was teamed with Rosberg and certainly has not relegated Bottas to #2 status from day 1 of the season the way Rubens was. Trying to take what happened yesterday (at a point in the season where Bottas is out of the championship while Lewis is in it) and suggest that this is what Hamilton's time at Mercedes has been like consistently is just inaccurate.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5449
Zoue wrote:
Invade wrote:
Lewis' racing after the pitstop was spectacular and has been lost in the furore of Merc team orders. His inspired push to get a move done which likely had to be done early in the life of the tyres essentially turned a likely P3 into a P1. If Vettel holds off Hamilton then Bottas probably wins the race.

This moment of hellbent racing was vital in securing the win.

His car was significantly quicker than the Ferrari, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't even make the remotest attempt on Bottas.

Not really. Vettel had no problem keeping up with the Mercedes' race pace; never dropping more than 2.5 seconds back the entire race and usually staying within 2 seconds. The pit release put Lewis right behind Vettel (much closer than he likely could have gotten on his own driving through dirty air) and Vettel's very aggressive defense into T2 left him on the back foot through T3. THat allowed Lewis to get a run and the slipstream effect on these cars can be immense.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6442
sandman1347 wrote:
Blake wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Blake wrote:

There are more races per season.

There are also 2 years with a defacto #2 teammate vs all 5 for Michael with a 100% #2 teammate...


:lol:

So predictable. As I have stated many times previously, I don't have much of a problem with team orders, so this doesn't bother me. Actually there is a degree of relief, as finally we can put to rest the "only Ferrari" faction on team orders. Oh, and yes, I know that there will be a vigorous defense of how Michael won all of his WDCs because of #1 status and team orders as opposed to Lewis not having had that advantage... there always is.

However, to put things simply: the post I responded to was touting that Lewis has now won as many races from 2014-2018 as Schumi did from 2000-2004, I simply stated that there are more races per year now than there were then, a legitimate factor. Secondly, while Schumi did, at times, benefit from some team orders, there is no denying that so too has Lewis. Both are facts.

ciao.

Sure but the fact is that Michael benefited from team orders from day 1 of every season with Ferrari; wheres Lewis didn't benefit from them much at all during the years where he was teamed with Rosberg and certainly has not relegated Bottas to #2 status from day 1 of the season the way Rubens was. Trying to take what happened yesterday (at a point in the season where Bottas is out of the championship while Lewis is in it) and suggest that this is what Hamilton's time at Mercedes has been like consistently is just inaccurate.

That is not a fact. There have been a handful of times that Rubens moved for him, and that's about it. I can remember only 2 actually, just from memory.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 11:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5449
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Blake wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Blake wrote:

There are more races per season.

There are also 2 years with a defacto #2 teammate vs all 5 for Michael with a 100% #2 teammate...


:lol:

So predictable. As I have stated many times previously, I don't have much of a problem with team orders, so this doesn't bother me. Actually there is a degree of relief, as finally we can put to rest the "only Ferrari" faction on team orders. Oh, and yes, I know that there will be a vigorous defense of how Michael won all of his WDCs because of #1 status and team orders as opposed to Lewis not having had that advantage... there always is.

However, to put things simply: the post I responded to was touting that Lewis has now won as many races from 2014-2018 as Schumi did from 2000-2004, I simply stated that there are more races per year now than there were then, a legitimate factor. Secondly, while Schumi did, at times, benefit from some team orders, there is no denying that so too has Lewis. Both are facts.

ciao.

Sure but the fact is that Michael benefited from team orders from day 1 of every season with Ferrari; wheres Lewis didn't benefit from them much at all during the years where he was teamed with Rosberg and certainly has not relegated Bottas to #2 status from day 1 of the season the way Rubens was. Trying to take what happened yesterday (at a point in the season where Bottas is out of the championship while Lewis is in it) and suggest that this is what Hamilton's time at Mercedes has been like consistently is just inaccurate.

That is not a fact. There have been a handful of times that Rubens moved for him, and that's about it. I can remember only 2 actually, just from memory.

Moving aside is only one implementation. Michael had preference on strategy and parts from day 1 wheres Mercedes always run identical machinery and have fairness at the heart of their strategy implementation (lead driver stops first, etc.). From the first race of the season, Rubens was not racing Michael. There was no circumstance through which Rubens could compete for the driver's championship as is evidenced by Austria 2002. That was only the 6th round of the season and Michael was already miles in front (as was the car). There is a massive difference between the way those Ferrari teams ran and how Mercedes runs currently despite some people's attempts to distort yesterday's events. Yesterday was harsh but we're 3/4 of the way through the season and Bottas is out of the title fight. If ever there is a time that TOs are justified, it's this type of scenario (where one driver is still in it and the other is out).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 5:33 pm
Posts: 306
F1_Ernie wrote:
I don't care who uses team orders, like Vettel said it's a "no brainer", i just dont understand how everyone is overreacting, what if these points do make a difference at the end of season? You need to get the title wrapped up asap. Makes me laugh how some people seem to forget Kimi's race gets sacrificed at any point of the season, mostly due to him not having the speed to contend with the top drivers though, like Bottas who doesn't have the speed and consistently to content for the title, get yourself in a position for the title and you won't need to pull over.


exactly


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:54 pm
Posts: 1019
Xink wrote:
Ferrari would have done exactly the same today if roles were reversed.
Hamilton finally gets some clear assistance from a team-mate to move closer to winning the WDC and the internet goes into meltdown


Ferrari in the old days of Fernando and Schumacher.. definitely and they did. As a result they would compete usually the last race or actually win the championship.

Ferrari unwilling to make a number 1 in that team has caused problems with Kimi holding up Vettel and giving away valuable points.

We all know why Bottas has been pushed to the number 2 slot.. it's because he hasn't been on form this season. When you look at the drivers championships.. even when Bottas has given up slot to Lewis.. he would still be close to 100 points above him.. anyone moaning about it.. should look at those standings.

Lewis is now leading Vettel (his closest rival.. not his team mate but a Ferrari driver) by 50 points. Without Bottas moving over.. it would be what 30? 25? 1 single DNF... and Vettel is right back in the fight.. which is great for us fans but terrible for Mercedes and Lewis.

Bottas hasn't performed consistently enough. Nico did a better job which is why them two would be fighting each other (also taking each other out).

What people don't think about is.. if Lewis had pushed to fight Bottas.. they take each other out is the worst scenario for Mercedes.. losing not just 25 points but 2nd place. So do you tell Lewis to stop? well they should be racing right?

Look at Ferrari.. they make little mistakes and it costs them heavily. Mercedes seem to be making so few and that is why they've got a nice gap between them and Ferrari.

I hate team orders.. I hated them back in the day and still hate them... but.. after what we've witnessed in F1.. nothing is certain and Vettel/Ferrari could very well fight back. It takes a single race of DNF or Lewis/Bottas taking each other out to change this championship.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 4:09 pm
Posts: 4296
Location: LONDON...!
F1_Ernie wrote:
I don't care who uses team orders, like Vettel said it's a "no brainer", i just dont understand how everyone is overreacting, what if these points do make a difference at the end of season? You need to get the title wrapped up asap. Makes me laugh how some people seem to forget Kimi's race gets sacrificed at any point of the season, mostly due to him not having the speed to contend with the top drivers though, like Bottas who doesn't have the speed and consistently to content for the title, get yourself in a position for the title and you won't need to pull over.

Because its Hamilton :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 12:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6442
sandman1347 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Blake wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
There are also 2 years with a defacto #2 teammate vs all 5 for Michael with a 100% #2 teammate...


:lol:

So predictable. As I have stated many times previously, I don't have much of a problem with team orders, so this doesn't bother me. Actually there is a degree of relief, as finally we can put to rest the "only Ferrari" faction on team orders. Oh, and yes, I know that there will be a vigorous defense of how Michael won all of his WDCs because of #1 status and team orders as opposed to Lewis not having had that advantage... there always is.

However, to put things simply: the post I responded to was touting that Lewis has now won as many races from 2014-2018 as Schumi did from 2000-2004, I simply stated that there are more races per year now than there were then, a legitimate factor. Secondly, while Schumi did, at times, benefit from some team orders, there is no denying that so too has Lewis. Both are facts.

ciao.

Sure but the fact is that Michael benefited from team orders from day 1 of every season with Ferrari; wheres Lewis didn't benefit from them much at all during the years where he was teamed with Rosberg and certainly has not relegated Bottas to #2 status from day 1 of the season the way Rubens was. Trying to take what happened yesterday (at a point in the season where Bottas is out of the championship while Lewis is in it) and suggest that this is what Hamilton's time at Mercedes has been like consistently is just inaccurate.

That is not a fact. There have been a handful of times that Rubens moved for him, and that's about it. I can remember only 2 actually, just from memory.

Moving aside is only one implementation. Michael had preference on strategy and parts from day 1 wheres Mercedes always run identical machinery and have fairness at the heart of their strategy implementation (lead driver stops first, etc.). From the first race of the season, Rubens was not racing Michael. There was no circumstance through which Rubens could compete for the driver's championship as is evidenced by Austria 2002. That was only the 6th round of the season and Michael was already miles in front (as was the car). There is a massive difference between the way those Ferrari teams ran and how Mercedes runs currently despite some people's attempts to distort yesterday's events. Yesterday was harsh but we're 3/4 of the way through the season and Bottas is out of the title fight. If ever there is a time that TOs are justified, it's this type of scenario (where one driver is still in it and the other is out).


Ok, it is just that you talked about team orders above and what you just described just now are not. Yes he had preference on some things, like the spare car, etc., but again, you talked about team orders and apart from Austria 2000 and Austria 2002 it did not happened anywhere else (again from memory as I cannot check here at the moment). The circumstance that Rubens would be able to compete for the WDC would be if he was faster; he wasn't.

I agree that Austria was ridiculous at the time and quite poor sport, but given how they lost the titles for a handful of points in recent years, I can't blame them exactly for trying to maximise their chances. So I am not trying to compare it with yesterday, I was just adding my 2p regarding the statement above.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 1:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5449
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
That is not a fact. There have been a handful of times that Rubens moved for him, and that's about it. I can remember only 2 actually, just from memory.

Moving aside is only one implementation. Michael had preference on strategy and parts from day 1 wheres Mercedes always run identical machinery and have fairness at the heart of their strategy implementation (lead driver stops first, etc.). From the first race of the season, Rubens was not racing Michael. There was no circumstance through which Rubens could compete for the driver's championship as is evidenced by Austria 2002. That was only the 6th round of the season and Michael was already miles in front (as was the car). There is a massive difference between the way those Ferrari teams ran and how Mercedes runs currently despite some people's attempts to distort yesterday's events. Yesterday was harsh but we're 3/4 of the way through the season and Bottas is out of the title fight. If ever there is a time that TOs are justified, it's this type of scenario (where one driver is still in it and the other is out).


Ok, it is just that you talked about team orders above and what you just described just now are not. Yes he had preference on some things, like the spare car, etc., but again, you talked about team orders and apart from Austria 2000 and Austria 2002 it did not happened anywhere else (again from memory as I cannot check here at the moment). The circumstance that Rubens would be able to compete for the WDC would be if he was faster; he wasn't.

I agree that Austria was ridiculous at the time and quite poor sport, but given how they lost the titles for a handful of points in recent years, I can't blame them exactly for trying to maximise their chances. So I am not trying to compare it with yesterday, I was just adding my 2p regarding the statement above.

Most of the time Rubens just moved without being asked. There were more than just two times he moved over for Michael (no I do not want to go playing detective to put together an exact figure but I do recall seeing it happen several times). The higher profile cases were not the only ones and team orders do not only come over the radio.

Mercedes, by comparison, did not even want to move Bottas yesterday. They did it grudgingly when they felt the result was under threat. Had they wanted to implement team orders from the start, the most effective way to have done it would have been to pit Hamilton before Bottas and allow him to undercut. Instead they stuck to their policy of pitting the leading driver first and even cost Hamilton a position by not pitting him immediately afterwards. To try to suggest that Lewis is in a similar situation to what Michael had is way off the mark.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 634
The logic to not pit Hamilton immediately after Bottas was they were worried about Verstappen holding them up. I think if, Hamilton pitted the lap after then Vettel would have stayed out to see how it panned out with Verstappen and also if a SC came out he would win the race.

I think if Verstappen wasn't there, they might have pitted Hamilton first but opted to just mirror Vettel (safe bet).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6442
sandman1347 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Moving aside is only one implementation. Michael had preference on strategy and parts from day 1 wheres Mercedes always run identical machinery and have fairness at the heart of their strategy implementation (lead driver stops first, etc.). From the first race of the season, Rubens was not racing Michael. There was no circumstance through which Rubens could compete for the driver's championship as is evidenced by Austria 2002. That was only the 6th round of the season and Michael was already miles in front (as was the car). There is a massive difference between the way those Ferrari teams ran and how Mercedes runs currently despite some people's attempts to distort yesterday's events. Yesterday was harsh but we're 3/4 of the way through the season and Bottas is out of the title fight. If ever there is a time that TOs are justified, it's this type of scenario (where one driver is still in it and the other is out).


Ok, it is just that you talked about team orders above and what you just described just now are not. Yes he had preference on some things, like the spare car, etc., but again, you talked about team orders and apart from Austria 2000 and Austria 2002 it did not happened anywhere else (again from memory as I cannot check here at the moment). The circumstance that Rubens would be able to compete for the WDC would be if he was faster; he wasn't.

I agree that Austria was ridiculous at the time and quite poor sport, but given how they lost the titles for a handful of points in recent years, I can't blame them exactly for trying to maximise their chances. So I am not trying to compare it with yesterday, I was just adding my 2p regarding the statement above.

Most of the time Rubens just moved without being asked. There were more than just two times he moved over for Michael (no I do not want to go playing detective to put together an exact figure but I do recall seeing it happen several times). The higher profile cases were not the only ones and team orders do not only come over the radio.

Mercedes, by comparison, did not even want to move Bottas yesterday. They did it grudgingly when they felt the result was under threat. Had they wanted to implement team orders from the start, the most effective way to have done it would have been to pit Hamilton before Bottas and allow him to undercut. Instead they stuck to their policy of pitting the leading driver first and even cost Hamilton a position by not pitting him immediately afterwards. To try to suggest that Lewis is in a similar situation to what Michael had is way off the mark.


Really? Is this the same Rubens that (by his own saying) had to be pretty much contractually blackmailed to get out of the way in Austria '02? I don't believe it for a second, Rubens was the most vocal driver against these things after Webber, he did not take these things lightly.

As I said, I am not putting Hamilton on the same ballpark as Schumacher, it wasn't me who mentioned that, just wanted to point out that Ferrari did not order Schumacher's team mates as many times as people believe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 4:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 4:05 am
Posts: 316
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Moving aside is only one implementation. Michael had preference on strategy and parts from day 1 wheres Mercedes always run identical machinery and have fairness at the heart of their strategy implementation (lead driver stops first, etc.). From the first race of the season, Rubens was not racing Michael. There was no circumstance through which Rubens could compete for the driver's championship as is evidenced by Austria 2002. That was only the 6th round of the season and Michael was already miles in front (as was the car). There is a massive difference between the way those Ferrari teams ran and how Mercedes runs currently despite some people's attempts to distort yesterday's events. Yesterday was harsh but we're 3/4 of the way through the season and Bottas is out of the title fight. If ever there is a time that TOs are justified, it's this type of scenario (where one driver is still in it and the other is out).


Ok, it is just that you talked about team orders above and what you just described just now are not. Yes he had preference on some things, like the spare car, etc., but again, you talked about team orders and apart from Austria 2000 and Austria 2002 it did not happened anywhere else (again from memory as I cannot check here at the moment). The circumstance that Rubens would be able to compete for the WDC would be if he was faster; he wasn't.

I agree that Austria was ridiculous at the time and quite poor sport, but given how they lost the titles for a handful of points in recent years, I can't blame them exactly for trying to maximise their chances. So I am not trying to compare it with yesterday, I was just adding my 2p regarding the statement above.

Most of the time Rubens just moved without being asked. There were more than just two times he moved over for Michael (no I do not want to go playing detective to put together an exact figure but I do recall seeing it happen several times). The higher profile cases were not the only ones and team orders do not only come over the radio.

Mercedes, by comparison, did not even want to move Bottas yesterday. They did it grudgingly when they felt the result was under threat. Had they wanted to implement team orders from the start, the most effective way to have done it would have been to pit Hamilton before Bottas and allow him to undercut. Instead they stuck to their policy of pitting the leading driver first and even cost Hamilton a position by not pitting him immediately afterwards. To try to suggest that Lewis is in a similar situation to what Michael had is way off the mark.


Really? Is this the same Rubens that (by his own saying) had to be pretty much contractually blackmailed to get out of the way in Austria '02? I don't believe it for a second, Rubens was the most vocal driver against these things after Webber, he did not take these things lightly.

As I said, I am not putting Hamilton on the same ballpark as Schumacher, it wasn't me who mentioned that, just wanted to point out that Ferrari did not order Schumacher's team mates as many times as people believe.


It's funny how people get outraged to overt team-orders, when both Ferrari and Merc have inferior number 2 drivers. The best drivers in F1 undisputedly are Vettel, Alonso, Verstappen, Ricciardo and Hamilton in no particular order. The fact that only two of them are fighting for the championship tells you that the teams are running defacto team orders. It's a joke that Ricciardo isn't in the Ferrari next year, and Alonso is being forced to retire.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 4:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6442
shay550 wrote:

It's funny how people get outraged to overt team-orders, when both Ferrari and Merc have inferior number 2 drivers. The best drivers in F1 undisputedly are Vettel, Alonso, Verstappen, Ricciardo and Hamilton in no particular order. The fact that only two of them are fighting for the championship tells you that the teams are running defacto team orders. It's a joke that Ricciardo isn't in the Ferrari next year, and Alonso is being forced to retire.


That's a different discussion altogether. Can you remember what happened the last time two top drivers got together? Alonso-Hamilton, Mansell-Prost, Senna-Prost, these are good examples of top partnerships that went sour really fast. Button-Hamilton (though I do not rate Button as high as the other drivers I mentioned) went relatively ok, but equally these two did not get on particularly well either. Having a top driver and someone good enough to partner him is a model that works, tried and tested.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 5:03 am
Posts: 389
Some very shabby logic here. Lewis passed Vettel into a corner, after a very minor mistake (which Vettel admitted) gave him an opening to gain using drs. Please see again how Lewis gained on Bottas on the opening lap after a poor start and very nearly passed by Vettel. He caught up and pulled alongside Bottas and would have passed if they didn't run out of straight. The tow was massive. After catching up Vettel, they avoided a clash, he stuck at it and passed under braking, this time Vettel leaving room. I would say good driving.

Russia is notoriously hard to overtake. And this was top car vs top car. It's not like it was a front runner against a midfield team. Lewis was clearly faster than Bottas. He didn't pass. And in fact he did pull to within 5 tenths and 7 tenths of Bottas applying pressure. But there was no mistake to let him in. Nothing in the race showed Mercedes were 'significantly' faster than Ferrari in the race. In the opening stint when they would have obviously wanted to pull clear of Vettel to avoid the undercut considering there were two cars, they didn't manage it. When Lewis had to push setting purple times (before he caught the Williams) throughout Vettel was there, as real evidence on live timing showed. 1.9 seconds, to 2.014 then 2.017 (that's nothing) then back to 1.9.... While Lewis was going purple. See how Vettel closed to Bottas on his flying lap to undercut Lewis, and Bottas was still trying to win the race then. Vettel himself has said he was faster than Bottas, though not enough to get past. For not saying he was faster than Lewis, that's probably down to Lewis just being fast. I suspect Mercedes were faster, but not by much.

But ye, great explanation. The mercedes was simply much faster. That's cleared the mystery for us. The self driving much faster Mercedes just pulled up and passed the Ferrari, no driver input. Just like Monza, in fact the mercedes was 4 secs a lap faster there. Ye

Guys can't even give credit. So called sports fans. It's a shame. Takes the fun out of it sometimes. Some of us also enjoy the racing. Ugh


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: JN23 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