planetf1.com

That'll be some of the etc..,yeah.

I neither know or care. I'm used to team mates being the only competition.

_________________
"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

"Helmut is responsible for the junior programme and he’s been great at picking young talent – he’s only got one eye but it’s a good one."

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God

I rely on Prost



FA#14

Meaning the 2 year contract was the only serious contract that Red Bull would consider offering Alonso.

As there ever been a situation when a driver has approached a team mid season wanting to replace a driver there and then because it's a winning car and his car can't even get on the podium?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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

I'm just showing that it's quite common place in F1, also it's not like either Rosberg or Hamilton walked into a dominant car as you choose to highlight 2014-16, unlike Alonso who is walking into a situation of having a dominant car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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

Meaning exactly what he said I'd imagine.

How would I know?.

_________________
"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

It is common, which is why I'm used to it and mentioned some examples. Not sure what it matters when you join a team, it certainly doesn't to me, and I highlighted more than that one.

Shock horror for including the most recent example in F1.

_________________
"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

You seem to missing the point of what I'm saying that this year is the weakest LMP1 (top class) has probably ever been so is the ideal time for Alonso to try and win Le Mans.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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

Well I don't recall this ever happening before.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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

Yes and as I said only in the same sense team mate competition being the only competition is the easiest way to win in F1 too.

_________________
"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

Nor me.

_________________
"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

Again I don't understand the relevance of what you said, I'm stating the obvious that if Alonso wants to win Le Mans then now is the ideal time because the WEC has never been as weak as it is now, this has got nothing to do with past happenings in F1.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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

You originally said it would be the easiest year to win. I pointed out it is in the same sense any competition that comes down to team mates, (like in F1), would be deemed the easiest years to win. How are you struggling so badly to follow?.

If you'd written what you'd written this time I'd have just responded with "thanks for pointing out the obvious" or not responded at all.

_________________
"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

Again what has that got to do with F1?

It's a stand alone statement that I made about the WEC and Le Mans.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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

It's just a comparison of another Motorsport competition you could deem was easiest to win if it's a team mate only battle that year.

What's wrong?.

_________________
"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

Because you are totally missing the point of Alonso doing Le Mans next year because there is no other manufacturer competing in LMP1 apart from Toyota, you seem to have the need to divert attention away from this.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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

Good grief, It's easy to miss a point you never raised until now. No, I was responding to your post about it being the easiest year to win with an example from another discipline you could deem the same. I'm sure you don't need reminded even two horse races can be tricky little blighters to actually win.

On your new and I believe 3rd point already...I'm pretty sure its the first year Alonso can do Le Mans contractually but there you go deciding you know the real motivation for everyone again. He was supposed to go the year Hulk went for example but McHonda stopped it as they (Porsche) were competitors. He clearly used his contract negotiations to make sure that can't happen again rather than waiting until there was only 1 Manufacturer like you brought up for the first time here. He can't do Indy next year as they are expecting a competitive car in Monaco so Le Mans was always going to be the target as it didn't clash with the F1 calendar nor Toyota clash with McRenault.

I have no need to divert attention away from something you literally just created in your own mind and mentioned for the first time poker. I was responding to the "easiest year to win". Its you that seems to equate next years Le Mans being a team mate only battle means that it's easy to win, not me, and as I've pointed out I'm used to examples in other disciplines so what is there for me to divert from exactly?.

I don't care how you win personally. Having more manufacturers there but they were much weaker than Toyota wouldn't make it any harder to win. Having more manufacturers but they all retired during the event wouldn't make it any harder to win. Having your competitors in the exact same car is more than good enough for me in the absence of a choc full grid with equal performance.

It's you that seems to struggle with it so there's simply no need for me to divert anything but there's plenty of reasons to disagree with the sentiment it's the easiest year to win just because it's between team mates. And my F1 experience is a big reason why I disagree so of course I'm going to mention it.

And I don't care if that's an inconvenient comparison 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

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opin ... -dominance

Interesting read about Alonso's team mate record with some stats.

_________________
"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

The figures don't look right in particular with Hamilton, look for yourself.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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

Since you're the one who brought it up, why don't you tell us what's wrong about it?

_________________
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)

Why? You busy?

I don't think the numbers match up for Button 2015 either fwiw but without knowing what results he dropped and what ones he hasn't there's not a lot I can say to counter it. These are his results from his system and systems can differ when it comes to which results to count.

Interesting read regardless.

_________________
"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

His figures are based on qualifying so that's something that's quite easy to look up and bear in mind that Hamilton carried more fuel more often than Alonso.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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

You could look as well but I guess some don't like to do the legwork?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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

Obviously I looked and that's why I questioned it, I had my own system for that year so instantly knew it looked wrong, then I tried to see what he did in order to favour Alonso, ignoring fuel weights because maybe he cheated and just googled?

Anyway I just can't fathom out what he did, he gives no explanation, the qualifying times are there for anyone to google, whatever I post will be shot down anyway.

Regarding Alonso and Button, in 2015 I gave it to Button by 0.026s, he had it as 0s, in 2016 I gave it to Alonso by 0.173s, he gave it to Alonso by 0.139s, interesting if you take the 2 seasons together we are only 0.008s apart.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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

It's more about the predictable way you zero in on a defence of Hamilton's figures. Anyway, if you dispute it then it's down to you to do the legwork, surely?

You said yourself your figures are pretty close to his, so maybe there's a small difference in your methodologies. He did write the following disclaimer:

All stats based only on where direct comparison possible, taking out different specs, qualifying sessions decided by track placement on varying track, mechanical failures etc.

in particular noting the "etc" at the end means he could have well made allowances for the different fuel levels, among other things. Who's to say your methodology is perfect and his isn't (or vice versa, of course)?

In any event, I think you're splitting hairs. If you have a variance of merely 0.008s over his figures in the example given, then it's not as though you can claim his figures to be wildly off the mark, in which case the general thrust of the article is still valid

Sure, they're easily accessible. But it's really poor forum etiquette to come into a discussion, throw out some assertion with nothing to back it up, then tell everyone else to go waste some of their own time doing the research you should have presented with your original argument. That's only one (small) step from pure baiting.

_________________
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)

I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have to google it so we can rule that out. If you've got the same number of comparable results then I'd at best guess suggest a differing fuel correction method. I don't know what you or he use but James Allen also had Alonso marginally quicker on the old ITV blog at the time so maybe Mark's own results from his own publication back then had similar and he simply checked his records.

I think we've been over Button 2015 before and if you're still counting Monaco despite Alonso's failure then maybe that's the difference. But then he might be also counting failures for all I know and there's a difference elsewhere, that's the problem when we don't have a list of which results he counted and which he didn't. He does mention 7 comparable events for 2015 and that's what I had for races and completely clean weekends in total but there were other qualifying sessions that were clean but maybe there was a spec difference in some I'm unaware off, Macca can be bad for that. Or maybe he didn't count qualy if the race was ruined anyway or if there was a penalty and he discounted it even if they both ran.

This is the issue, not everyone uses the same criteria to determine what is or isn't a fair match up. By your method he's wrong, but by his he's right.

_________________
"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

He's at it again...https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opin ... statistics

Me posting this doesn't mean I agree, there are things I don't for example how he decides to include Webber but rule out Kimi/Massa/Trulli from the strength of team mate argument and again it doesn't tell us which ones were counted and which ones weren't. Also doesn't include Seb's STR season for some reason.

But it's interesting and well worth a read anyway. Arguably thread worthy but I'll leave it here and if anyone fancies expanding on it with a separate thread then fill your boots folks.

_________________
"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

Loved a comment below that was basically splitting the 3 of them into what job you'd give them and the guy said Lewis to qualify the car, Alonso to race it and Seb to speak to the press and interact with the team.

Can't argue with it tbh.

_________________
"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

Definitely interesting. One little snippet in particular may go some way to explaining the anomalies above:

Percentage lap time averages have been shown for qualifying comparison rather than lap time averages so as to remove the skew of the comparable data being over different length tracks (i.e. a 0.2sec difference means much more on a short lap than a long one).

That could easily account for significant variances in qualifying figures between two systems.

On another note, I'm a little surprised about the Kovi figures. I'm sure I remember a claim somewhere that he actually had very comparable speed to Hamilton in qualifying, but was let down by being consistently fuelled heavier. But the figures in the article don't make pretty reading for him

Good spot, that could well explain it.

_________________
"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

'tis a frequent pattern that I have argued against myself quite often.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15

He confirms this system and has gone into more detail in the comments section....(The question is basically what 3 results did you discount to get the quali score 7-7 between Lewis-Alonso in 2007)

_________________
"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

Have to say I appreciate it when the authors go into more detail in the comments section, it can add so much more to the article even when the article itself is interesting enough like this one.

_________________
"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

Agreed, and he makes a very good point about percentages instead of raw numbers. Two tenths at Monaco is not the same thing as two tenths at Spa.

Interesting that he says fuel adjusting helps Alonso, whereas pokerman seems to be saying the opposite. I wonder what everyone's sources are, and if there's any actual official data available for each race.

_________________
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)

Interesting update, thanks. Agree with you that it's refreshing when an author takes the time to engage and debate his articles.

The percentage method makes sense to me. Comparing times with e.g. Spa and Austria is bound to throw up misleading figures

Yeah agree about the %. (And with Zoue above)

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


I hated it as it obvious left poles meaning little or being at least misleading. Silverstone for Alonso is one I remember as fuel corrected he was allegedly nearly half a second quicker than Lewis but it's a Lewis pole. Hard to get excited about poles in this era when that happens. (Same the other way around in Monaco with Lewis being quicker than pole sitter Alonso).

Some of it is discussed here..https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comme ... aps_alonso

_________________
"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

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.

_________________
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)

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.

_________________
"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

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?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

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