Zoue wrote:
I even re-quoted my original post to you but you still don't seem to get it, I'm afraid. I said Vettel didn't improve and gave evidence for that as the fact that he didn't get markedly more points in the second half of the season. I said it looked like he improved by the fact that his opponents were all over the place, whereas his own performance remained consistent, and elaborated on that in a reply to SmoothRide detailing all the points from a couple of main players.
You asked me to explain my position on what I said, and I did it. And you do not give me even for the right what exact post and exact statement of yours I was referring even when was quoting your words several time by now. No. You want to go re-quoting me whatever else you chose.
Please pay some more close attention this time.
"When he has improved in the second half - to my mind only 2012 and 2013 qualify - it's not necessarily because he has learned better than his opponents: there have been other, to my mind more plausible, reasons for these improvements. Even in 2010 when he came from way behind to clinch the title, when you look beyond the stats you will see that he didn't improve so much as his main rivals dropped off: Seb stayed consistent all year long. So in the end I'm saying that his success has been down to strong all-year performance, not due to adapting part way through the year".
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=9680&start=40#p401247There, not only that you are not arguing that other line of your evidence "that he didn't get markedly more points in the second half of the season", but you are even asking us to look
beyond those stats there where the same do not support your above expressed position that Vettel did not really learn/improve better than his opponents even in those years where the stats would suggest that he was. There, you are reaching for another kind of evidence, beyond those stats, that would establish your claim that Vettel did not really learn/improve more than others. There, you even include 2010 with your particular evidence why we should understand that Vettel did not learn/improve.
(as far as that "strong all-year performance" last line, it is not even related to Vettel's learning/improving but: success)
Quote:
I don't know why you keep insisting that I claimed his opponents performance is proof of Vettel's own lack thereof, since that is never a claim I made.
And no, I definitely never said that you claimed that Vettels' opponents' performance was the proof of Vettel's own lack thereof.
(here, you even use the completely wrong word 'performance' that is not at all same what 'learning' or 'improving' is to mean, but I'll assume it was not meant)
What I am saying is, you used Alonso and Webber failing to win that title in Abu Dhabi) as your evidence
to support your above expressed position how Vettel did not learn/improve (even no matter what the stats/points might say to us otherwise; we should look beyond those). You are wanting us to understand how Vettel did not learn/improve, and that is what you are using that fact of Alonso failing. Call it "fact" or "evidence" or "proof" of whatever, I don't even care. Go sticking to one word and refusing to se the real context and the meaning. Be my guest.
Quote:
Even when I explain it to you you still keep repeating it, so I think we are really talking two different languages here. I don't think anything I say will actually get through to you and I don't even mean that from a point of view of convincing you of my argument.
Well, maybe for a change you might try to understand what exactly post of yours I am discussing here instead of respiting something else. Then you will surely succeed to get through.
Quote:
If we can't even agree on the meaning of the words I say then there's really no chance to move forward at all. From my perspective I want to focus on the bigger picture but you appear to want to analyse every single word seemingly irrespective of context. It makes for a very frustrating, not to mention pedantic, discussion and I just don't think we will ever resolve this. The word games of proof versus evidence is, no pun intended, evidence of that
Agreeing on the meaning of the words…? How about starting agreeing on what post/statement of yours I have been referring to with that my comment?
Never mind. So, you say that it is about your "bigger picture".
Well, there it is. Right there in that same above quoted post of yours that I have been referring to all the time, and that you have been attempting to replace with some other, so called "OP" of yours. There, where you are asking us to look
beyond those stats. That would be the bigger picture, wouldn't it, looking beyond the stats? You use the stats when they are in your favor to support your position that Vettel did not learn/improve any better than his opponents. But that would cover only a couple of years at the best, no? Then, to get that bigger picture of yours, you are asking us to look beyond those stats.
Your "small picture": People, look at the stats, and you will see that Vettel did not learn/improve any better than his rivals in year 2010 and 2011.
Your "bigger picture": People, look beyond those stats, and you will see that Vettel did not learn/improve any better than his rivals in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013.
And you accuse me for not seeing that bigger picture of yours, and how frustrating that must be for you?
Quote:
I wish you luck
Thanks, but feeling the effect yet…
