TheGiantHogweed wrote:
lamo wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
lamo wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
This is just stats, but Bottas's average qualifying position is exactly 3rd when I work out the mean. While Hamilton's is now 3.4. It does show that even though Bottas has been down very often, he hasn't been any worse than 6th. While Hamilton has let himself down in this area in Monaco and here. I still think that in a way, Bottas is reasonably consistent in qualifying. I know the average qualifying position doesn't really matter. It is just interesting that it is now in Bottas's favour.
...and that is how you completely miss use statistics folks. Hamiltons average starting position was 2.4 before today. Now it is 3.3 and suddenly that makes Bottas consistent because his is lower?
Actually watching the sessions, Bottas has had about 8 awful qualifying sessions this year (in the 0.450-0.800 range behind) and Hamilton has had 3. The car should never start lower than 3rd/4th with the exception of Singapore. Far too many no shows from Bottas to be considered consistent over 1 lap.
Well yes and it is just because of this. Hamilton has had two qualifying sessions which were far lower than anything Bottas has ever done this year. In this sence, even if it seems a bit silly, Bottas has been more consistent. As
his highs and lows are nothing like as far apart as Hamilton's.And I think it is unreasonable of you to say 8 of Bottas's qualifying sessions have been "awful". In that case, I'd say Hamilton's runs were very good, but not outstanding. Bottas has been poor IMO just a few times, but not awful. And considering many say Hamilton has been simply outstanding, surely that means Bottas isn't doing quite as bad as it seems. He's not been great, but on the whole considering he's up against Hamilton and other teams are far stronger this year, I can't say he's been that bad in qualifying. I only brought it up because it is now one area where Bottas has got a better average position due to not making huge mistakes. I don't see how this is much more strange than when you created a thread speculating how Rosberg
might have done relative to Bottas.
Average starting position does not equal consistency.
I believe Raikkonen's average starting position is ahead of Vettels too?
My mistake, it is 7 races out of 18 he has been 0.450+ behind. 39% of the time. I think its a bit rich calling somebody consistent who is nearly half a second slower than their team mate 39% of the time. Unless you mean consistently inconsistent.
Canada +0.70
Baku +0.45
GB +0.75
Spa +0.55
Monza +2.2 seconds
Malaysia +0.70
USA +0.45
Which of these wasn't awful?
In the 2014 Mercedes he probably starts all of those races still P2 behind Hamilton. In the 2008 Mclaren, Hamilton won the title in - those kind of gaps would put him starting P8-P12 with Hamilton on pole. Starting position is a function of the competitiveness of the car and the 2017 Mercedes is a great car capable of the front row nearly every weekend.
What I mean by consistent relative to Hamilton is what I stated in bold. And I still disagree with your definition of awful. If he's up against Hamilton who constantly gets called outstanding in this 2nd half of the season, I can't call many of Bottas's runs awful. Monza is about the only one I could use that word for as he clearly made a big mistake. Hamilton was clearly extremely good in all of them, and Bottas just wasn't close. I think I'd say that he just didn't do a good job. But the word awful just seems a bit much to me. Maybe we just think about the meaning of these words differently. What word would you use for Hamilton's run today? I wouldn't say awful for that as we didn't really see much. But as he didn't even set a lap time and Bottas managed pole, what word would you use that is far worse than awful? As what Hamilton did today was significantly worse than Bottas's worst run of the year.
Relative to Hamilton? The times are relative to Hamilton. The times don't lie, but the positions can give misleading information due to the competitiveness of the car.
Put Lance Stroll in the 2014 Mercedes and he would start basically every single race P2.. would that be consistent? What if the gaps to his team mate ranged from 0.4-1.0 over the season. In fact, if Stroll had been in Rosbergs car in 2014 it would mean Hamilton broke down twice in qualifying and started two races P20 thus Stroll could have lost 18-0 in qualifying and yet had a better qualifying average than Hamilton which shows how meaningless average starting position can be. Also by this measure, it would make probably Ericson the most consistent driver of the year in terms of qualifying position.
I think Vettel is 15-4 up against Kimi year and is also behind him on average starting position.
Hamiltons was poor today but he just made a mistake, that happens. Russia was much worse IMO than today. Because he got thrashed by Bottas, straight up and was terrible slow. Today he likely would have been on pole but just made a mistake.
I think we will have to disagree. In the last 30 years, it is almost unheard for a driver in the WDC/WCC to be in the 0.5+ range behind his team mate regularly. 0.6-0.7 is Jolyon Palmer esque. Bottas has been 0.7+ off Hamilton in 22% of the races this year. I don't remember any driver in a top car, in the last 30 years having so many huge gaps to their team in one season. If those aren't awful, then how slow does he have to be? 1 second+?
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
