planetf1.com

It is currently Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:50 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3758
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
I'm not sure about 07 but James Allen used to publish the fuel data in either 08 or 09 I believe. You need the amount of fuel it takes to complete a lap,what that weight penalty means around that track and then what lap they pitted on. Here's an example of what the BBC typically did in 2009..http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/f1mole/2009/ ... bahra.html

That only really determines a minimum amount of fuel though, doesn't it? They might have pitted before the car was empty for strategic reasons.


I don't think it's an exact science but teams did tend to run the car dry though as that's when it was at its quickest and you didn't want to not have a low fuel run during the race but yeah if they got stuck or something happened then it could change I imagine but not too early or you might have to stop again if you now can't carry enough to make it to the end and you were on a one-stopper.

Nobody stopped earlier because after you re-fuelled you would be up to 3 seconds a lap slower.

Hamilton stopped later than Alonso in Australia (1 lap), Malaysia (2 laps), Spain (3 laps), Monaco (2/3 laps), Turkey (2 laps), Spa (1 lap) and Japan (1 lap).

Alonso stopped later than Hamilton in Bahrain (3 laps), Canada (1 lap), USA (1 lap), Silverstone (4 laps) and Italy (2 laps).

The other 2 races he uses they stopped on the same lap, I'm curious how Hughes ascertains that Alonso carried more fuel than Hamilton?


Info from the team maybe? Alternate weekends?

Pass.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 6:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24140
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
I'm not sure about 07 but James Allen used to publish the fuel data in either 08 or 09 I believe. You need the amount of fuel it takes to complete a lap,what that weight penalty means around that track and then what lap they pitted on. Here's an example of what the BBC typically did in 2009..http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/f1mole/2009/ ... bahra.html

That only really determines a minimum amount of fuel though, doesn't it? They might have pitted before the car was empty for strategic reasons.


I don't think it's an exact science but teams did tend to run the car dry though as that's when it was at its quickest and you didn't want to not have a low fuel run during the race but yeah if they got stuck or something happened then it could change I imagine but not too early or you might have to stop again if you now can't carry enough to make it to the end and you were on a one-stopper.

Nobody stopped earlier because after you re-fuelled you would be up to 3 seconds a lap slower.

Hamilton stopped later than Alonso in Australia (1 lap), Malaysia (2 laps), Spain (3 laps), Monaco (2/3 laps), Turkey (2 laps), Spa (1 lap) and Japan (1 lap).

Alonso stopped later than Hamilton in Bahrain (3 laps), Canada (1 lap), USA (1 lap), Silverstone (4 laps) and Italy (2 laps).

The other 2 races he uses they stopped on the same lap, I'm curious how Hughes ascertains that Alonso carried more fuel than Hamilton?


Info from the team maybe? Alternate weekends?

Pass.

That makes no sense it's a performance disadvantage to carry more fuel then you need to.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 7:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3758
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
That only really determines a minimum amount of fuel though, doesn't it? They might have pitted before the car was empty for strategic reasons.


I don't think it's an exact science but teams did tend to run the car dry though as that's when it was at its quickest and you didn't want to not have a low fuel run during the race but yeah if they got stuck or something happened then it could change I imagine but not too early or you might have to stop again if you now can't carry enough to make it to the end and you were on a one-stopper.

Nobody stopped earlier because after you re-fuelled you would be up to 3 seconds a lap slower.

Hamilton stopped later than Alonso in Australia (1 lap), Malaysia (2 laps), Spain (3 laps), Monaco (2/3 laps), Turkey (2 laps), Spa (1 lap) and Japan (1 lap).

Alonso stopped later than Hamilton in Bahrain (3 laps), Canada (1 lap), USA (1 lap), Silverstone (4 laps) and Italy (2 laps).

The other 2 races he uses they stopped on the same lap, I'm curious how Hughes ascertains that Alonso carried more fuel than Hamilton?


Info from the team maybe? Alternate weekends?

Pass.

That makes no sense it's a performance disadvantage to carry more fuel then you need to.


I've no idea what they or Mark Hughes did. What two are causing you grief specifically here, I'm a bit lost as to what the issue is?

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 02, 2018 2:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4712
Location: Michigan, USA
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
That only really determines a minimum amount of fuel though, doesn't it? They might have pitted before the car was empty for strategic reasons.

Nobody stopped earlier because after you re-fuelled you would be up to 3 seconds a lap slower.

I'm sure I've read accounts of people making an earlier stop and not filling up entirely, making the stop faster because they were already carrying some fuel. I'll see if I can dig anything up later, but I have a distinct memory of reading that at least once.

I mean, you could make the same statement about modern F1: Nobody goes longer because you'll be 3 seconds a lap slower due to tyre wear. But people still do it for strategic reasons, and I'm sure they did the inverse back in the refueling era.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 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 #3)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24140
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

I don't think it's an exact science but teams did tend to run the car dry though as that's when it was at its quickest and you didn't want to not have a low fuel run during the race but yeah if they got stuck or something happened then it could change I imagine but not too early or you might have to stop again if you now can't carry enough to make it to the end and you were on a one-stopper.

Nobody stopped earlier because after you re-fuelled you would be up to 3 seconds a lap slower.

Hamilton stopped later than Alonso in Australia (1 lap), Malaysia (2 laps), Spain (3 laps), Monaco (2/3 laps), Turkey (2 laps), Spa (1 lap) and Japan (1 lap).

Alonso stopped later than Hamilton in Bahrain (3 laps), Canada (1 lap), USA (1 lap), Silverstone (4 laps) and Italy (2 laps).

The other 2 races he uses they stopped on the same lap, I'm curious how Hughes ascertains that Alonso carried more fuel than Hamilton?


Info from the team maybe? Alternate weekends?

Pass.

That makes no sense it's a performance disadvantage to carry more fuel then you need to.


I've no idea what they or Mark Hughes did. What two are causing you grief specifically here, I'm a bit lost as to what the issue is?

Mark Hughes has actually not revealed any data, fuel loads were not known before the race and only known when drivers did their first pit stop, what he actually reveals is very vague and it seems his figures rely on Alonso carrying more fuel than Hamilton.

In the early part of the season when Alonso was clearly being favoured, Hamilton carried more fuel than Alonso in 4 of the 5 races, going forward from that would Alonso go along with carrying more fuel and disadvantaging himself in qualifying, it just doesn't add up.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 02, 2018 2:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3758
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Nobody stopped earlier because after you re-fuelled you would be up to 3 seconds a lap slower.

Hamilton stopped later than Alonso in Australia (1 lap), Malaysia (2 laps), Spain (3 laps), Monaco (2/3 laps), Turkey (2 laps), Spa (1 lap) and Japan (1 lap).

Alonso stopped later than Hamilton in Bahrain (3 laps), Canada (1 lap), USA (1 lap), Silverstone (4 laps) and Italy (2 laps).

The other 2 races he uses they stopped on the same lap, I'm curious how Hughes ascertains that Alonso carried more fuel than Hamilton?


Info from the team maybe? Alternate weekends?

Pass.

That makes no sense it's a performance disadvantage to carry more fuel then you need to.


I've no idea what they or Mark Hughes did. What two are causing you grief specifically here, I'm a bit lost as to what the issue is?

Mark Hughes has actually not revealed any data, fuel loads were not known before the race and only known when drivers did their first pit stop, what he actually reveals is very vague and it seems his figures rely on Alonso carrying more fuel than Hamilton.

In the early part of the season when Alonso was clearly being favoured, Hamilton carried more fuel than Alonso in 4 of the 5 races, going forward from that would Alonso go along with carrying more fuel and disadvantaging himself in qualifying, it just doesn't add up.


Ask him, I've still no idea what specific weekends you feel there is an issue and I can't be bothered doing your legwork for you. (What race,who won quali,who's turn it was for q preference,what did Mark give,what did you give etc..)

Without all that I don't know what to say and I'm not prepared to work it all out from the list you gave citing just the pit stops. If you want a conversation, for the second time, give the specifics, I'm not doing your work for you. You haven't even said which two they stopped at the same time as if I'm supposed to know immediately what two races are missing from the list from 11 years ago,who actually won the q,who's turn it was for fuel preference..etc

Specifics if you want a convo, I'm not a mind reader and I'm not doing your work for you.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 2:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24140
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Info from the team maybe? Alternate weekends?

Pass.

That makes no sense it's a performance disadvantage to carry more fuel then you need to.


I've no idea what they or Mark Hughes did. What two are causing you grief specifically here, I'm a bit lost as to what the issue is?

Mark Hughes has actually not revealed any data, fuel loads were not known before the race and only known when drivers did their first pit stop, what he actually reveals is very vague and it seems his figures rely on Alonso carrying more fuel than Hamilton.

In the early part of the season when Alonso was clearly being favoured, Hamilton carried more fuel than Alonso in 4 of the 5 races, going forward from that would Alonso go along with carrying more fuel and disadvantaging himself in qualifying, it just doesn't add up.


Ask him, I've still no idea what specific weekends you feel there is an issue and I can't be bothered doing your legwork for you. (What race,who won quali,who's turn it was for q preference,what did Mark give,what did you give etc..)

Without all that I don't know what to say and I'm not prepared to work it all out from the list you gave citing just the pit stops. If you want a conversation, for the second time, give the specifics, I'm not doing your work for you. You haven't even said which two they stopped at the same time as if I'm supposed to know immediately what two races are missing from the list from 11 years ago,who actually won the q,who's turn it was for fuel preference..etc

Specifics if you want a convo, I'm not a mind reader and I'm not doing your work for you.

Mark Hughes listed the 14 races that he used so I just assumed that would be obvious.

All the fuel corrected qualifying sessions that have either Alonso on top or Hamilton on top correspond to mine it's just the actual end result that seems to be a lot different.

Looking through his methodology I have to covert my figures to % differences and double check some other things as well, I remember comparing the % difference before and it made only 0.01s difference.

What I need to do will take a fair bit of time including posting on here so I need to make the time available at some point.

I have a feeling that when I've done all this the question I will be asking is what happened to all this extra fuel that Alonso supposedly was carrying?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 6:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3758
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
That makes no sense it's a performance disadvantage to carry more fuel then you need to.


I've no idea what they or Mark Hughes did. What two are causing you grief specifically here, I'm a bit lost as to what the issue is?

Mark Hughes has actually not revealed any data, fuel loads were not known before the race and only known when drivers did their first pit stop, what he actually reveals is very vague and it seems his figures rely on Alonso carrying more fuel than Hamilton.

In the early part of the season when Alonso was clearly being favoured, Hamilton carried more fuel than Alonso in 4 of the 5 races, going forward from that would Alonso go along with carrying more fuel and disadvantaging himself in qualifying, it just doesn't add up.


Ask him, I've still no idea what specific weekends you feel there is an issue and I can't be bothered doing your legwork for you. (What race,who won quali,who's turn it was for q preference,what did Mark give,what did you give etc..)

Without all that I don't know what to say and I'm not prepared to work it all out from the list you gave citing just the pit stops. If you want a conversation, for the second time, give the specifics, I'm not doing your work for you. You haven't even said which two they stopped at the same time as if I'm supposed to know immediately what two races are missing from the list from 11 years ago,who actually won the q,who's turn it was for fuel preference..etc

Specifics if you want a convo, I'm not a mind reader and I'm not doing your work for you.

Mark Hughes listed the 14 races that he used so I just assumed that would be obvious.

All the fuel corrected qualifying sessions that have either Alonso on top or Hamilton on top correspond to mine it's just the actual end result that seems to be a lot different.

Looking through his methodology I have to covert my figures to % differences and double check some other things as well, I remember comparing the % difference before and it made only 0.01s difference.

What I need to do will take a fair bit of time including posting on here so I need to make the time available at some point.

I have a feeling that when I've done all this the question I will be asking is what happened to all this extra fuel that Alonso supposedly was carrying?


So if they all correspond but the result then why do you keep insinuating he's favoring Alonso instead of questioning your own work or at the very least take the trouble to convert each result to a % like he does first instead of throwing around bias allegations straight away. Do you use one constant figure to work out the fuel correction or do you have a figure for the differing demands of each track that could influence fuel usage as I'm sure he has?

You mentioned two that they stopped on the same lap and wondered why Hughes ascertains Alonso carried more fuel. This is where the confusion lay as you didn't say what two and I shouldn't have to go back and work out what those two were, it's been pointed out before several times what appalling forum etiquette you have but in the interest of actually getting somewhere I did go and check and I see Brazil was one of the two you couldn't bring yourself to write.


That'll be the Brazil where Lewis changed strategy during the race,won the Q in the session and indeed was given that Q fuel corrected by Hughes anyway (You know, that obvious list you mention)

So what's the problem there? Who did you give it to and why do you seem to think Alonso was carrying more fuel and Hughes is favoring him by thinking so when he gave it to Lewis? Or do you now accept this result considering you are now saying they all correspond?

The other one is China where Ron himself said in amongst the tyre pressure allegations that Alonso carried more fuel but only a couple of tenths worth, but which again Hughes gives to Hamilton fuel corrected anyway. (I don't think he does tyre pressure corrections :o )

Sort your argument out. In case you've forgotten...

pokerman wrote:
The other 2 races he uses they stopped on the same lap, I'm curious how Hughes ascertains that Alonso carried more fuel than Hamilton?


...In short, he doesn't.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 8:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3758
Just checked and they didn't even stop at the same time in China so if anyone's results should be called into question it's your own poker. Brazil they stopped together but I'm not going to check the others, I'm happy to believe Mark Hughes until shown a good reason to do otherwise.

Lewis-Lap 15
Alonso-Lap 18
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp ... 031363.stm

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 1:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24140
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

I've no idea what they or Mark Hughes did. What two are causing you grief specifically here, I'm a bit lost as to what the issue is?

Mark Hughes has actually not revealed any data, fuel loads were not known before the race and only known when drivers did their first pit stop, what he actually reveals is very vague and it seems his figures rely on Alonso carrying more fuel than Hamilton.

In the early part of the season when Alonso was clearly being favoured, Hamilton carried more fuel than Alonso in 4 of the 5 races, going forward from that would Alonso go along with carrying more fuel and disadvantaging himself in qualifying, it just doesn't add up.


Ask him, I've still no idea what specific weekends you feel there is an issue and I can't be bothered doing your legwork for you. (What race,who won quali,who's turn it was for q preference,what did Mark give,what did you give etc..)

Without all that I don't know what to say and I'm not prepared to work it all out from the list you gave citing just the pit stops. If you want a conversation, for the second time, give the specifics, I'm not doing your work for you. You haven't even said which two they stopped at the same time as if I'm supposed to know immediately what two races are missing from the list from 11 years ago,who actually won the q,who's turn it was for fuel preference..etc

Specifics if you want a convo, I'm not a mind reader and I'm not doing your work for you.

Mark Hughes listed the 14 races that he used so I just assumed that would be obvious.

All the fuel corrected qualifying sessions that have either Alonso on top or Hamilton on top correspond to mine it's just the actual end result that seems to be a lot different.

Looking through his methodology I have to covert my figures to % differences and double check some other things as well, I remember comparing the % difference before and it made only 0.01s difference.

What I need to do will take a fair bit of time including posting on here so I need to make the time available at some point.

I have a feeling that when I've done all this the question I will be asking is what happened to all this extra fuel that Alonso supposedly was carrying?


So if they all correspond but the result then why do you keep insinuating he's favoring Alonso instead of questioning your own work or at the very least take the trouble to convert each result to a % like he does first instead of throwing around bias allegations straight away. Do you use one constant figure to work out the fuel correction or do you have a figure for the differing demands of each track that could influence fuel usage as I'm sure he has?

You mentioned two that they stopped on the same lap and wondered why Hughes ascertains Alonso carried more fuel. This is where the confusion lay as you didn't say what two and I shouldn't have to go back and work out what those two were, it's been pointed out before several times what appalling forum etiquette you have but in the interest of actually getting somewhere I did go and check and I see Brazil was one of the two you couldn't bring yourself to write.


That'll be the Brazil where Lewis changed strategy during the race,won the Q in the session and indeed was given that Q fuel corrected by Hughes anyway (You know, that obvious list you mention)

So what's the problem there? Who did you give it to and why do you seem to think Alonso was carrying more fuel and Hughes is favoring him by thinking so when he gave it to Lewis? Or do you now accept this result considering you are now saying they all correspond?

The other one is China where Ron himself said in amongst the tyre pressure allegations that Alonso carried more fuel but only a couple of tenths worth, but which again Hughes gives to Hamilton fuel corrected anyway. (I don't think he does tyre pressure corrections :o )

Sort your argument out. In case you've forgotten...

pokerman wrote:
The other 2 races he uses they stopped on the same lap, I'm curious how Hughes ascertains that Alonso carried more fuel than Hamilton?


...In short, he doesn't.

The China one is a puzzle unless it was said at the time that Hamilton pitted because his wets were worn so I reasoned he pitted because of the tyres rather than the fuel but I take on board this needs to be altered now.

Alonso carrying more fuel is a generalisation of the season were Hughes states that the official stats that have Hamilton ahead are wrong because it doesn't take into account fuel adjusted times.

I do have a list of tracks with the time lost per lap of fuel so I can make the calculations, at the time I made the fuel adjustment calculation I didn't have the list so I averaged out 1 lap of fuel equals 0.1s, I think I actually obtained the list a year later were I saw that the overall average is more like 0.08s.

My average had Hamilton 0.069s ahead whereas Hughes has Alonso 0.016s ahead which is quite a big difference, also I have seen other people making these calculations which are very similar to mine which is why I questioned Hughes figures in the first place.

I will work all this out and I will post it perhaps tomorrow when I should have the time to do it.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 4:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3758
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Mark Hughes has actually not revealed any data, fuel loads were not known before the race and only known when drivers did their first pit stop, what he actually reveals is very vague and it seems his figures rely on Alonso carrying more fuel than Hamilton.

In the early part of the season when Alonso was clearly being favoured, Hamilton carried more fuel than Alonso in 4 of the 5 races, going forward from that would Alonso go along with carrying more fuel and disadvantaging himself in qualifying, it just doesn't add up.


Ask him, I've still no idea what specific weekends you feel there is an issue and I can't be bothered doing your legwork for you. (What race,who won quali,who's turn it was for q preference,what did Mark give,what did you give etc..)

Without all that I don't know what to say and I'm not prepared to work it all out from the list you gave citing just the pit stops. If you want a conversation, for the second time, give the specifics, I'm not doing your work for you. You haven't even said which two they stopped at the same time as if I'm supposed to know immediately what two races are missing from the list from 11 years ago,who actually won the q,who's turn it was for fuel preference..etc

Specifics if you want a convo, I'm not a mind reader and I'm not doing your work for you.

Mark Hughes listed the 14 races that he used so I just assumed that would be obvious.

All the fuel corrected qualifying sessions that have either Alonso on top or Hamilton on top correspond to mine it's just the actual end result that seems to be a lot different.

Looking through his methodology I have to covert my figures to % differences and double check some other things as well, I remember comparing the % difference before and it made only 0.01s difference.

What I need to do will take a fair bit of time including posting on here so I need to make the time available at some point.

I have a feeling that when I've done all this the question I will be asking is what happened to all this extra fuel that Alonso supposedly was carrying?


So if they all correspond but the result then why do you keep insinuating he's favoring Alonso instead of questioning your own work or at the very least take the trouble to convert each result to a % like he does first instead of throwing around bias allegations straight away. Do you use one constant figure to work out the fuel correction or do you have a figure for the differing demands of each track that could influence fuel usage as I'm sure he has?

You mentioned two that they stopped on the same lap and wondered why Hughes ascertains Alonso carried more fuel. This is where the confusion lay as you didn't say what two and I shouldn't have to go back and work out what those two were, it's been pointed out before several times what appalling forum etiquette you have but in the interest of actually getting somewhere I did go and check and I see Brazil was one of the two you couldn't bring yourself to write.


That'll be the Brazil where Lewis changed strategy during the race,won the Q in the session and indeed was given that Q fuel corrected by Hughes anyway (You know, that obvious list you mention)

So what's the problem there? Who did you give it to and why do you seem to think Alonso was carrying more fuel and Hughes is favoring him by thinking so when he gave it to Lewis? Or do you now accept this result considering you are now saying they all correspond?

The other one is China where Ron himself said in amongst the tyre pressure allegations that Alonso carried more fuel but only a couple of tenths worth, but which again Hughes gives to Hamilton fuel corrected anyway. (I don't think he does tyre pressure corrections :o )

Sort your argument out. In case you've forgotten...

pokerman wrote:
The other 2 races he uses they stopped on the same lap, I'm curious how Hughes ascertains that Alonso carried more fuel than Hamilton?


...In short, he doesn't.

The China one is a puzzle unless it was said at the time that Hamilton pitted because his wets were worn so I reasoned he pitted because of the tyres rather than the fuel but I take on board this needs to be altered now.

Alonso carrying more fuel is a generalisation of the season were Hughes states that the official stats that have Hamilton ahead are wrong because it doesn't take into account fuel adjusted times.

I do have a list of tracks with the time lost per lap of fuel so I can make the calculations, at the time I made the fuel adjustment calculation I didn't have the list so I averaged out 1 lap of fuel equals 0.1s, I think I actually obtained the list a year later were I saw that the overall average is more like 0.08s.

My average had Hamilton 0.069s ahead whereas Hughes has Alonso 0.016s ahead which is quite a big difference, also I have seen other people making these calculations which are very similar to mine which is why I questioned Hughes figures in the first place.

I will work all this out and I will post it perhaps tomorrow when I should have the time to do it.


For China-I thought you said they never pit while still carrying fuel when talking to Exediron?

Alonso carrying more fuel is your own generalisation, Hughes is talking about the official results as in 10-7 to Lewis doesn't take into account fuel correction rather than any official avg. gap not taking it into account. There is no "official" avg. gap as far as I know but officially Lewis won 10-7. (His fuel adjusted score being 7-7).

An avg fuel penalty across the year of only 0.08 sounds way way to low. One of the links I shared shows Bahrain as being worth 0.035 per kg with fuel consumption being 2.6kg per lap in 2009 (BBC) . This F1 fanatic one for 2016 cars shows time penalty of 0.054 at 1.7kg per lap. https://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/f1-informat ... nformation

We really need 2007/8 era estimates and I can't find any unfortunately.

Like I said James Allen also had Alonso marginally quicker at the time on his ITV forum (No idea if it was as a % though, last time I looked for it there was only a dead link) so Hughes isn't saying anything new. I'd bet my last buck there is just a difference in fuel correction calculations between you and I'd trust theirs more tbh as he states...

Mark Hughes wrote:
A mix of all of those, Anthony. For fuel effect calculations, my own data from the time, collected from the teams.

Comments section. https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opin ... statistics

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 8:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24140
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

Ask him, I've still no idea what specific weekends you feel there is an issue and I can't be bothered doing your legwork for you. (What race,who won quali,who's turn it was for q preference,what did Mark give,what did you give etc..)

Without all that I don't know what to say and I'm not prepared to work it all out from the list you gave citing just the pit stops. If you want a conversation, for the second time, give the specifics, I'm not doing your work for you. You haven't even said which two they stopped at the same time as if I'm supposed to know immediately what two races are missing from the list from 11 years ago,who actually won the q,who's turn it was for fuel preference..etc

Specifics if you want a convo, I'm not a mind reader and I'm not doing your work for you.

Mark Hughes listed the 14 races that he used so I just assumed that would be obvious.

All the fuel corrected qualifying sessions that have either Alonso on top or Hamilton on top correspond to mine it's just the actual end result that seems to be a lot different.

Looking through his methodology I have to covert my figures to % differences and double check some other things as well, I remember comparing the % difference before and it made only 0.01s difference.

What I need to do will take a fair bit of time including posting on here so I need to make the time available at some point.

I have a feeling that when I've done all this the question I will be asking is what happened to all this extra fuel that Alonso supposedly was carrying?


So if they all correspond but the result then why do you keep insinuating he's favoring Alonso instead of questioning your own work or at the very least take the trouble to convert each result to a % like he does first instead of throwing around bias allegations straight away. Do you use one constant figure to work out the fuel correction or do you have a figure for the differing demands of each track that could influence fuel usage as I'm sure he has?

You mentioned two that they stopped on the same lap and wondered why Hughes ascertains Alonso carried more fuel. This is where the confusion lay as you didn't say what two and I shouldn't have to go back and work out what those two were, it's been pointed out before several times what appalling forum etiquette you have but in the interest of actually getting somewhere I did go and check and I see Brazil was one of the two you couldn't bring yourself to write.


That'll be the Brazil where Lewis changed strategy during the race,won the Q in the session and indeed was given that Q fuel corrected by Hughes anyway (You know, that obvious list you mention)

So what's the problem there? Who did you give it to and why do you seem to think Alonso was carrying more fuel and Hughes is favoring him by thinking so when he gave it to Lewis? Or do you now accept this result considering you are now saying they all correspond?

The other one is China where Ron himself said in amongst the tyre pressure allegations that Alonso carried more fuel but only a couple of tenths worth, but which again Hughes gives to Hamilton fuel corrected anyway. (I don't think he does tyre pressure corrections :o )

Sort your argument out. In case you've forgotten...

pokerman wrote:
The other 2 races he uses they stopped on the same lap, I'm curious how Hughes ascertains that Alonso carried more fuel than Hamilton?


...In short, he doesn't.

The China one is a puzzle unless it was said at the time that Hamilton pitted because his wets were worn so I reasoned he pitted because of the tyres rather than the fuel but I take on board this needs to be altered now.

Alonso carrying more fuel is a generalisation of the season were Hughes states that the official stats that have Hamilton ahead are wrong because it doesn't take into account fuel adjusted times.

I do have a list of tracks with the time lost per lap of fuel so I can make the calculations, at the time I made the fuel adjustment calculation I didn't have the list so I averaged out 1 lap of fuel equals 0.1s, I think I actually obtained the list a year later were I saw that the overall average is more like 0.08s.

My average had Hamilton 0.069s ahead whereas Hughes has Alonso 0.016s ahead which is quite a big difference, also I have seen other people making these calculations which are very similar to mine which is why I questioned Hughes figures in the first place.

I will work all this out and I will post it perhaps tomorrow when I should have the time to do it.


For China-I thought you said they never pit while still carrying fuel when talking to Exediron?

Alonso carrying more fuel is your own generalisation, Hughes is talking about the official results as in 10-7 to Lewis doesn't take into account fuel correction rather than any official avg. gap not taking it into account. There is no "official" avg. gap as far as I know but officially Lewis won 10-7. (His fuel adjusted score being 7-7).

An avg fuel penalty across the year of only 0.08 sounds way way to low. One of the links I shared shows Bahrain as being worth 0.035 per kg with fuel consumption being 2.6kg per lap in 2009 (BBC) . This F1 fanatic one for 2016 cars shows time penalty of 0.054 at 1.7kg per lap. https://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/f1-informat ... nformation

We really need 2007/8 era estimates and I can't find any unfortunately.

Like I said James Allen also had Alonso marginally quicker at the time on his ITV forum (No idea if it was as a % though, last time I looked for it there was only a dead link) so Hughes isn't saying anything new. I'd bet my last buck there is just a difference in fuel correction calculations between you and I'd trust theirs more tbh as he states...

Mark Hughes wrote:
A mix of all of those, Anthony. For fuel effect calculations, my own data from the time, collected from the teams.

Comments section. https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opin ... statistics

Regarding China this was over 10 years ago so I can't remember why I did it, I didn't make notes because it was just for my own personal use, so I'm guessing it was because his wet tyres were badly worn which can lose performance faster than dry tyres which hardly degraded, and he got brought in early, you yourself mentioned that Dennis said Alonso lost 2 tenths in qualifying which equates to 2 laps of fuel but Hamilton came in 3 laps before Alonso so it sounds like he did come in early which basically might have threw me out then?

For what it's worth here are the fuel correction figures.

Effect of 10kg of fuel on laptimes (per lap)
Spa             0.48s = 0.168
Melbourne       0.46s = 0.115
Sepang          0.44s = 0.111
Shanghai        0.44s = 0.113
Hungaroring     0.43s = 0.086
Sakhir          0.4s = 0.098
Catalunya       0.42s = 0.093
Magny-Cours     0.42s = 0.087
Nurburgring     0.39s = 0.091
Silverstone     0.35s = 0.084
Interlagos      0.34s = 0.063
Monza           0.33s = 0.088
Istanbul Park   0.32s = 0.082
Fuji            0.32s = 0.075
Montreal        0.31s = 0.063
Monte Carlo     0.3s = 0.048
Indianapolis    0.27s = 0.052

Fuel burnt per lap (in kg.)
Spa             3.50
Monza           2.66
Shanghai        2.57
Istanbul Park   2.55
Sepang          2.53
Melbourne       2.5
Sakhir          2.45
Silverstone     2.39
Fuji            2.35
Nurburgring     2.33
Catalunya       2.22
Magny-Cours     2.08
Montreal        2.04
Hungaroring     2
Indianapolis    1.93
Interlagos      1.85
Monte Carlo     1.59

The number after the equals signs is the lap time per lap of fuel calculated by dividing the top number by 10 and then multiplying by the bottom number, the average is 0.085s so yes it is that low.

I've gone through it all and the more accurate fuel calculation plus using % differences for track lengths alters very little it just makes Hamilton 0.007s quicker than my initial calculations.

The only difference is leaving out the 3 races which Hughes did which benefited Hamilton 2-1 and the China readjustment which gives Alonso an extra 0.334s, then I have it as Hamilton being 0.034s quicker overall as opposed to Hughes having Alonso 0.016s quicker.

Apart from that am I lead to believe that for some reason Hamilton ran his car lower on fuel in the races than Alonso because Alonso has 8 laps of fuel not used which basically equates to over 20 seconds of lost performance in the races which just wasn't the way to go racing.

I could reveal all the data, the qualifying times are easy to check, when the drivers stopped for their first pit stops perhaps not as easy but I feel it's sort of wasting my time because Hughes will be very much the one to be right despite him not actually supplying any hard data.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4712
Location: Michigan, USA
pokerman wrote:
I've gone through it all and the more accurate fuel calculation plus using % differences for track lengths alters very little it just makes Hamilton 0.007s quicker than my initial calculations.

The only difference is leaving out the 3 races which Hughes did which benefited Hamilton 2-1 and the China readjustment which gives Alonso an extra 0.334s, then I have it as Hamilton being 0.034s quicker overall as opposed to Hughes having Alonso 0.016s quicker.

All of these are 0.0 numbers, and I honestly don't believe a qualifying gap average is accurate to more than one decimal place. All you and Hughes are collectively doing is proving that the gap between Alonso and Hamilton was effectively nothing in 2007, since the margin for error - whether you're the one making the error or Hughes, either way - is clearly at least half a tenth anyway.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 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 #3)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1790
This is tedious


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 6:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21134
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Mark Hughes listed the 14 races that he used so I just assumed that would be obvious.

All the fuel corrected qualifying sessions that have either Alonso on top or Hamilton on top correspond to mine it's just the actual end result that seems to be a lot different.

Looking through his methodology I have to covert my figures to % differences and double check some other things as well, I remember comparing the % difference before and it made only 0.01s difference.

What I need to do will take a fair bit of time including posting on here so I need to make the time available at some point.

I have a feeling that when I've done all this the question I will be asking is what happened to all this extra fuel that Alonso supposedly was carrying?


So if they all correspond but the result then why do you keep insinuating he's favoring Alonso instead of questioning your own work or at the very least take the trouble to convert each result to a % like he does first instead of throwing around bias allegations straight away. Do you use one constant figure to work out the fuel correction or do you have a figure for the differing demands of each track that could influence fuel usage as I'm sure he has?

You mentioned two that they stopped on the same lap and wondered why Hughes ascertains Alonso carried more fuel. This is where the confusion lay as you didn't say what two and I shouldn't have to go back and work out what those two were, it's been pointed out before several times what appalling forum etiquette you have but in the interest of actually getting somewhere I did go and check and I see Brazil was one of the two you couldn't bring yourself to write.


That'll be the Brazil where Lewis changed strategy during the race,won the Q in the session and indeed was given that Q fuel corrected by Hughes anyway (You know, that obvious list you mention)

So what's the problem there? Who did you give it to and why do you seem to think Alonso was carrying more fuel and Hughes is favoring him by thinking so when he gave it to Lewis? Or do you now accept this result considering you are now saying they all correspond?

The other one is China where Ron himself said in amongst the tyre pressure allegations that Alonso carried more fuel but only a couple of tenths worth, but which again Hughes gives to Hamilton fuel corrected anyway. (I don't think he does tyre pressure corrections :o )

Sort your argument out. In case you've forgotten...

pokerman wrote:
The other 2 races he uses they stopped on the same lap, I'm curious how Hughes ascertains that Alonso carried more fuel than Hamilton?


...In short, he doesn't.

The China one is a puzzle unless it was said at the time that Hamilton pitted because his wets were worn so I reasoned he pitted because of the tyres rather than the fuel but I take on board this needs to be altered now.

Alonso carrying more fuel is a generalisation of the season were Hughes states that the official stats that have Hamilton ahead are wrong because it doesn't take into account fuel adjusted times.

I do have a list of tracks with the time lost per lap of fuel so I can make the calculations, at the time I made the fuel adjustment calculation I didn't have the list so I averaged out 1 lap of fuel equals 0.1s, I think I actually obtained the list a year later were I saw that the overall average is more like 0.08s.

My average had Hamilton 0.069s ahead whereas Hughes has Alonso 0.016s ahead which is quite a big difference, also I have seen other people making these calculations which are very similar to mine which is why I questioned Hughes figures in the first place.

I will work all this out and I will post it perhaps tomorrow when I should have the time to do it.


For China-I thought you said they never pit while still carrying fuel when talking to Exediron?

Alonso carrying more fuel is your own generalisation, Hughes is talking about the official results as in 10-7 to Lewis doesn't take into account fuel correction rather than any official avg. gap not taking it into account. There is no "official" avg. gap as far as I know but officially Lewis won 10-7. (His fuel adjusted score being 7-7).

An avg fuel penalty across the year of only 0.08 sounds way way to low. One of the links I shared shows Bahrain as being worth 0.035 per kg with fuel consumption being 2.6kg per lap in 2009 (BBC) . This F1 fanatic one for 2016 cars shows time penalty of 0.054 at 1.7kg per lap. https://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/f1-informat ... nformation

We really need 2007/8 era estimates and I can't find any unfortunately.

Like I said James Allen also had Alonso marginally quicker at the time on his ITV forum (No idea if it was as a % though, last time I looked for it there was only a dead link) so Hughes isn't saying anything new. I'd bet my last buck there is just a difference in fuel correction calculations between you and I'd trust theirs more tbh as he states...

Mark Hughes wrote:
A mix of all of those, Anthony. For fuel effect calculations, my own data from the time, collected from the teams.

Comments section. https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opin ... statistics

Regarding China this was over 10 years ago so I can't remember why I did it, I didn't make notes because it was just for my own personal use, so I'm guessing it was because his wet tyres were badly worn which can lose performance faster than dry tyres which hardly degraded, and he got brought in early, you yourself mentioned that Dennis said Alonso lost 2 tenths in qualifying which equates to 2 laps of fuel but Hamilton came in 3 laps before Alonso so it sounds like he did come in early which basically might have threw me out then?

For what it's worth here are the fuel correction figures.

Effect of 10kg of fuel on laptimes (per lap)
Spa             0.48s = 0.168
Melbourne       0.46s = 0.115
Sepang          0.44s = 0.111
Shanghai        0.44s = 0.113
Hungaroring     0.43s = 0.086
Sakhir          0.4s = 0.098
Catalunya       0.42s = 0.093
Magny-Cours     0.42s = 0.087
Nurburgring     0.39s = 0.091
Silverstone     0.35s = 0.084
Interlagos      0.34s = 0.063
Monza           0.33s = 0.088
Istanbul Park   0.32s = 0.082
Fuji            0.32s = 0.075
Montreal        0.31s = 0.063
Monte Carlo     0.3s = 0.048
Indianapolis    0.27s = 0.052

Fuel burnt per lap (in kg.)
Spa             3.50
Monza           2.66
Shanghai        2.57
Istanbul Park   2.55
Sepang          2.53
Melbourne       2.5
Sakhir          2.45
Silverstone     2.39
Fuji            2.35
Nurburgring     2.33
Catalunya       2.22
Magny-Cours     2.08
Montreal        2.04
Hungaroring     2
Indianapolis    1.93
Interlagos      1.85
Monte Carlo     1.59

The number after the equals signs is the lap time per lap of fuel calculated by dividing the top number by 10 and then multiplying by the bottom number, the average is 0.085s so yes it is that low.

I've gone through it all and the more accurate fuel calculation plus using % differences for track lengths alters very little it just makes Hamilton 0.007s quicker than my initial calculations.

The only difference is leaving out the 3 races which Hughes did which benefited Hamilton 2-1 and the China readjustment which gives Alonso an extra 0.334s, then I have it as Hamilton being 0.034s quicker overall as opposed to Hughes having Alonso 0.016s quicker.

Apart from that am I lead to believe that for some reason Hamilton ran his car lower on fuel in the races than Alonso because Alonso has 8 laps of fuel not used which basically equates to over 20 seconds of lost performance in the races which just wasn't the way to go racing.

I could reveal all the data, the qualifying times are easy to check, when the drivers stopped for their first pit stops perhaps not as easy but I feel it's sort of wasting my time because Hughes will be very much the one to be right despite him not actually supplying any hard data.

Didn't Hughes mention that he collected data from the teams themselves? In which case his would likely involve a lot less guesswork than yours, so is more likely to be accurate


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 11:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3758
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Mark Hughes listed the 14 races that he used so I just assumed that would be obvious.

All the fuel corrected qualifying sessions that have either Alonso on top or Hamilton on top correspond to mine it's just the actual end result that seems to be a lot different.

Looking through his methodology I have to covert my figures to % differences and double check some other things as well, I remember comparing the % difference before and it made only 0.01s difference.

What I need to do will take a fair bit of time including posting on here so I need to make the time available at some point.

I have a feeling that when I've done all this the question I will be asking is what happened to all this extra fuel that Alonso supposedly was carrying?


So if they all correspond but the result then why do you keep insinuating he's favoring Alonso instead of questioning your own work or at the very least take the trouble to convert each result to a % like he does first instead of throwing around bias allegations straight away. Do you use one constant figure to work out the fuel correction or do you have a figure for the differing demands of each track that could influence fuel usage as I'm sure he has?

You mentioned two that they stopped on the same lap and wondered why Hughes ascertains Alonso carried more fuel. This is where the confusion lay as you didn't say what two and I shouldn't have to go back and work out what those two were, it's been pointed out before several times what appalling forum etiquette you have but in the interest of actually getting somewhere I did go and check and I see Brazil was one of the two you couldn't bring yourself to write.


That'll be the Brazil where Lewis changed strategy during the race,won the Q in the session and indeed was given that Q fuel corrected by Hughes anyway (You know, that obvious list you mention)

So what's the problem there? Who did you give it to and why do you seem to think Alonso was carrying more fuel and Hughes is favoring him by thinking so when he gave it to Lewis? Or do you now accept this result considering you are now saying they all correspond?

The other one is China where Ron himself said in amongst the tyre pressure allegations that Alonso carried more fuel but only a couple of tenths worth, but which again Hughes gives to Hamilton fuel corrected anyway. (I don't think he does tyre pressure corrections :o )

Sort your argument out. In case you've forgotten...

pokerman wrote:
The other 2 races he uses they stopped on the same lap, I'm curious how Hughes ascertains that Alonso carried more fuel than Hamilton?


...In short, he doesn't.

The China one is a puzzle unless it was said at the time that Hamilton pitted because his wets were worn so I reasoned he pitted because of the tyres rather than the fuel but I take on board this needs to be altered now.

Alonso carrying more fuel is a generalisation of the season were Hughes states that the official stats that have Hamilton ahead are wrong because it doesn't take into account fuel adjusted times.

I do have a list of tracks with the time lost per lap of fuel so I can make the calculations, at the time I made the fuel adjustment calculation I didn't have the list so I averaged out 1 lap of fuel equals 0.1s, I think I actually obtained the list a year later were I saw that the overall average is more like 0.08s.

My average had Hamilton 0.069s ahead whereas Hughes has Alonso 0.016s ahead which is quite a big difference, also I have seen other people making these calculations which are very similar to mine which is why I questioned Hughes figures in the first place.

I will work all this out and I will post it perhaps tomorrow when I should have the time to do it.


For China-I thought you said they never pit while still carrying fuel when talking to Exediron?

Alonso carrying more fuel is your own generalisation, Hughes is talking about the official results as in 10-7 to Lewis doesn't take into account fuel correction rather than any official avg. gap not taking it into account. There is no "official" avg. gap as far as I know but officially Lewis won 10-7. (His fuel adjusted score being 7-7).

An avg fuel penalty across the year of only 0.08 sounds way way to low. One of the links I shared shows Bahrain as being worth 0.035 per kg with fuel consumption being 2.6kg per lap in 2009 (BBC) . This F1 fanatic one for 2016 cars shows time penalty of 0.054 at 1.7kg per lap. https://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/f1-informat ... nformation

We really need 2007/8 era estimates and I can't find any unfortunately.

Like I said James Allen also had Alonso marginally quicker at the time on his ITV forum (No idea if it was as a % though, last time I looked for it there was only a dead link) so Hughes isn't saying anything new. I'd bet my last buck there is just a difference in fuel correction calculations between you and I'd trust theirs more tbh as he states...

Mark Hughes wrote:
A mix of all of those, Anthony. For fuel effect calculations, my own data from the time, collected from the teams.

Comments section. https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opin ... statistics

Regarding China this was over 10 years ago so I can't remember why I did it, I didn't make notes because it was just for my own personal use, so I'm guessing it was because his wet tyres were badly worn which can lose performance faster than dry tyres which hardly degraded, and he got brought in early, you yourself mentioned that Dennis said Alonso lost 2 tenths in qualifying which equates to 2 laps of fuel but Hamilton came in 3 laps before Alonso so it sounds like he did come in early which basically might have threw me out then?

For what it's worth here are the fuel correction figures.

Effect of 10kg of fuel on laptimes (per lap)
Spa             0.48s = 0.168
Melbourne       0.46s = 0.115
Sepang          0.44s = 0.111
Shanghai        0.44s = 0.113
Hungaroring     0.43s = 0.086
Sakhir          0.4s = 0.098
Catalunya       0.42s = 0.093
Magny-Cours     0.42s = 0.087
Nurburgring     0.39s = 0.091
Silverstone     0.35s = 0.084
Interlagos      0.34s = 0.063
Monza           0.33s = 0.088
Istanbul Park   0.32s = 0.082
Fuji            0.32s = 0.075
Montreal        0.31s = 0.063
Monte Carlo     0.3s = 0.048
Indianapolis    0.27s = 0.052

Fuel burnt per lap (in kg.)
Spa             3.50
Monza           2.66
Shanghai        2.57
Istanbul Park   2.55
Sepang          2.53
Melbourne       2.5
Sakhir          2.45
Silverstone     2.39
Fuji            2.35
Nurburgring     2.33
Catalunya       2.22
Magny-Cours     2.08
Montreal        2.04
Hungaroring     2
Indianapolis    1.93
Interlagos      1.85
Monte Carlo     1.59

The number after the equals signs is the lap time per lap of fuel calculated by dividing the top number by 10 and then multiplying by the bottom number, the average is 0.085s so yes it is that low.

I've gone through it all and the more accurate fuel calculation plus using % differences for track lengths alters very little it just makes Hamilton 0.007s quicker than my initial calculations.

The only difference is leaving out the 3 races which Hughes did which benefited Hamilton 2-1 and the China readjustment which gives Alonso an extra 0.334s, then I have it as Hamilton being 0.034s quicker overall as opposed to Hughes having Alonso 0.016s quicker.

Apart from that am I lead to believe that for some reason Hamilton ran his car lower on fuel in the races than Alonso because Alonso has 8 laps of fuel not used which basically equates to over 20 seconds of lost performance in the races which just wasn't the way to go racing.

I could reveal all the data, the qualifying times are easy to check, when the drivers stopped for their first pit stops perhaps not as easy but I feel it's sort of wasting my time because Hughes will be very much the one to be right despite him not actually supplying any hard data.


With China I'm just highlighting why talking in absolutes doesn't work. In the post I mentioned it's possible for strat reasons to stop earlier you replied nobody stopped earlier but then you mentioned China and assuming stopping was tyre related instead. You see how frustrating that is? You yourself had an example of what you thought was someone stopping while still carrying fuel yet you have to tell everyone in absolutes that nobody did it. (I got the Ron quote from here.. https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/63448 ... azilian-gp 4th from last question, James Allen about the tyre pressures)

Anyway I do appreciate you showing your figures but it raises a couple of questions, they don't match the BBC one from 09 so are they from 07/8 cars,yeah? Also you mention it might not be easy to provide when they first stopped so can I ask how you worked it out then? Can I assume you haven't double checked the others after being out in China by 3 laps but correct about Brazil from your own notes? Small differences could lie there perhaps. To find the China and Brazil one I googled F1 China(Or Brazil) 2007,BBC as it happened,for what it's worth.

Either way I still think it will be a small difference in the calculations rather than assuming one was carrying more or less fuel to that extent. It doesn't take much to be out to get a 0.050s swing does it. As Exediron mentions, it just highlights how close they were really but yes I'd obviously favour Hughes's figures as they are from data from the teams. He also mentions only using comparable laps not necessarily their last in Q3 so there could also be something there where you're using different gaps but yeah without his info there's not a lot else to say as without it I can only guess where the differences lay.

He does answer questions in his comments section though.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 12:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3758
GingerFurball wrote:
This is tedious


This is the off season.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1790
True, but in this particular thread we could be talking about Alonso's chances in WEC, or whether he might finally have a half decent car at McLaren, not whether he was faster than Hamilton, fuel adjusted, 11 years ago.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3758
GingerFurball wrote:
True, but in this particular thread we could be talking about Alonso's chances in WEC, or whether he might finally have a half decent car at McLaren, not whether he was faster than Hamilton, fuel adjusted, 11 years ago.


You can talk about all of that if you want to, no-one's stopping those things being discussed. More likely no-one says anything and the thread falls back to page 4 or whatever.

As for this exchange about the fuel adjustments, granted it's a long time ago but the article isn't,it was new and it concerns Alonso so seems fair game to me but happy to take it elsewhere if a mod feels differently and splits it off into it's own thread.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 20, 2018 2:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24140
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
The China one is a puzzle unless it was said at the time that Hamilton pitted because his wets were worn so I reasoned he pitted because of the tyres rather than the fuel but I take on board this needs to be altered now.

Alonso carrying more fuel is a generalisation of the season were Hughes states that the official stats that have Hamilton ahead are wrong because it doesn't take into account fuel adjusted times.

I do have a list of tracks with the time lost per lap of fuel so I can make the calculations, at the time I made the fuel adjustment calculation I didn't have the list so I averaged out 1 lap of fuel equals 0.1s, I think I actually obtained the list a year later were I saw that the overall average is more like 0.08s.

My average had Hamilton 0.069s ahead whereas Hughes has Alonso 0.016s ahead which is quite a big difference, also I have seen other people making these calculations which are very similar to mine which is why I questioned Hughes figures in the first place.

I will work all this out and I will post it perhaps tomorrow when I should have the time to do it.


For China-I thought you said they never pit while still carrying fuel when talking to Exediron?

Alonso carrying more fuel is your own generalisation, Hughes is talking about the official results as in 10-7 to Lewis doesn't take into account fuel correction rather than any official avg. gap not taking it into account. There is no "official" avg. gap as far as I know but officially Lewis won 10-7. (His fuel adjusted score being 7-7).

An avg fuel penalty across the year of only 0.08 sounds way way to low. One of the links I shared shows Bahrain as being worth 0.035 per kg with fuel consumption being 2.6kg per lap in 2009 (BBC) . This F1 fanatic one for 2016 cars shows time penalty of 0.054 at 1.7kg per lap. https://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/f1-informat ... nformation

We really need 2007/8 era estimates and I can't find any unfortunately.

Like I said James Allen also had Alonso marginally quicker at the time on his ITV forum (No idea if it was as a % though, last time I looked for it there was only a dead link) so Hughes isn't saying anything new. I'd bet my last buck there is just a difference in fuel correction calculations between you and I'd trust theirs more tbh as he states...

Mark Hughes wrote:
A mix of all of those, Anthony. For fuel effect calculations, my own data from the time, collected from the teams.

Comments section. https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opin ... statistics

Regarding China this was over 10 years ago so I can't remember why I did it, I didn't make notes because it was just for my own personal use, so I'm guessing it was because his wet tyres were badly worn which can lose performance faster than dry tyres which hardly degraded, and he got brought in early, you yourself mentioned that Dennis said Alonso lost 2 tenths in qualifying which equates to 2 laps of fuel but Hamilton came in 3 laps before Alonso so it sounds like he did come in early which basically might have threw me out then?

For what it's worth here are the fuel correction figures.

Effect of 10kg of fuel on laptimes (per lap)
Spa             0.48s = 0.168
Melbourne       0.46s = 0.115
Sepang          0.44s = 0.111
Shanghai        0.44s = 0.113
Hungaroring     0.43s = 0.086
Sakhir          0.4s = 0.098
Catalunya       0.42s = 0.093
Magny-Cours     0.42s = 0.087
Nurburgring     0.39s = 0.091
Silverstone     0.35s = 0.084
Interlagos      0.34s = 0.063
Monza           0.33s = 0.088
Istanbul Park   0.32s = 0.082
Fuji            0.32s = 0.075
Montreal        0.31s = 0.063
Monte Carlo     0.3s = 0.048
Indianapolis    0.27s = 0.052

Fuel burnt per lap (in kg.)
Spa             3.50
Monza           2.66
Shanghai        2.57
Istanbul Park   2.55
Sepang          2.53
Melbourne       2.5
Sakhir          2.45
Silverstone     2.39
Fuji            2.35
Nurburgring     2.33
Catalunya       2.22
Magny-Cours     2.08
Montreal        2.04
Hungaroring     2
Indianapolis    1.93
Interlagos      1.85
Monte Carlo     1.59

The number after the equals signs is the lap time per lap of fuel calculated by dividing the top number by 10 and then multiplying by the bottom number, the average is 0.085s so yes it is that low.

I've gone through it all and the more accurate fuel calculation plus using % differences for track lengths alters very little it just makes Hamilton 0.007s quicker than my initial calculations.

The only difference is leaving out the 3 races which Hughes did which benefited Hamilton 2-1 and the China readjustment which gives Alonso an extra 0.334s, then I have it as Hamilton being 0.034s quicker overall as opposed to Hughes having Alonso 0.016s quicker.

Apart from that am I lead to believe that for some reason Hamilton ran his car lower on fuel in the races than Alonso because Alonso has 8 laps of fuel not used which basically equates to over 20 seconds of lost performance in the races which just wasn't the way to go racing.

I could reveal all the data, the qualifying times are easy to check, when the drivers stopped for their first pit stops perhaps not as easy but I feel it's sort of wasting my time because Hughes will be very much the one to be right despite him not actually supplying any hard data.


With China I'm just highlighting why talking in absolutes doesn't work. In the post I mentioned it's possible for strat reasons to stop earlier you replied nobody stopped earlier but then you mentioned China and assuming stopping was tyre related instead. You see how frustrating that is? You yourself had an example of what you thought was someone stopping while still carrying fuel yet you have to tell everyone in absolutes that nobody did it. (I got the Ron quote from here.. https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/63448 ... azilian-gp 4th from last question, James Allen about the tyre pressures)

Anyway I do appreciate you showing your figures but it raises a couple of questions, they don't match the BBC one from 09 so are they from 07/8 cars,yeah? Also you mention it might not be easy to provide when they first stopped so can I ask how you worked it out then? Can I assume you haven't double checked the others after being out in China by 3 laps but correct about Brazil from your own notes? Small differences could lie there perhaps. To find the China and Brazil one I googled F1 China(Or Brazil) 2007,BBC as it happened,for what it's worth.

Either way I still think it will be a small difference in the calculations rather than assuming one was carrying more or less fuel to that extent. It doesn't take much to be out to get a 0.050s swing does it. As Exediron mentions, it just highlights how close they were really but yes I'd obviously favour Hughes's figures as they are from data from the teams. He also mentions only using comparable laps not necessarily their last in Q3 so there could also be something there where you're using different gaps but yeah without his info there's not a lot else to say as without it I can only guess where the differences lay.

He does answer questions in his comments section though.

The Russian unofficial McLaren site has the information.

If Hughes has all the relevant data then after 2007 it greatly favours Hamilton in respect to my data and has Hamilton far more competitive against Button than what Alonso was which sort of goes against quite a few view points on here.

Strange to see a complaint about the discussion of Hughes' article about Alonso.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


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: Alex53, Google Adsense [Bot], MistaVega23, owenmahamilton, 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