Formula 1 2018: General Discussion Thread

meeeeh

The article quoted explains a lot. Not to mention Alonso possibly had a reason to feel aggrieved how the negotiations went. I think he is s brilliant driver but to win in this year's Ferrari you actually have to stick with the team long enough.

Frustration at the competitive limitations he was experiencing at one point led Fernando to stipulate that he wanted a veto over technical recruitments, a point confirmed by a source inside Ferrari in 2014. But probably of more significance in this case was the atmosphere the driver’s frustration was lending to the team, regardless of how hard he was working.

“I had the feeling that Fernando had got it into his mind that he could never win with Ferrari,” said Montezemolo, “and that if he was in a Mercedes he could win with one hand and this was very demotivating for everyone. Let me be clear: I believe Alonso is probably the best driver in the world even today – certainly on a Sunday. Maybe not in qualifying, where I think Hamilton and Vettel are maybe faster over one lap, but in the race he is unbelievable – a machine. But we needed motivation and it made me think what we needed for the future. I recalled that when I was trying to convince Michael [Schumacher] to return with us after Felipe’s injury in 2009 he was saying, ‘the guy you need for the future is Vettel’.”

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/why-luca-preferred-vettel-over-alonso

ayux4rj6zql2ph

This post has been deleted.

H3llR4iser

Prisoner 6753 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Harika wrote: »

Raikkönen in den Lotus doesn't count? 4th in Constructors
Rosberg 2012 neither? 5th in Constructors

No and no - I mean wins on pure merit, not in crazy "nobody finishes" races, and with a car that had otherwise no business being in the lead. Both Raikkonen's Lotus and Rosberg's Merc were capable of getting podiums.

Anjobe wrote: »

Opinion, not fact. The counter opinion is that most of the time after 2008 the McLaren was an uncompetitive dog, and may not have been capable of winning anything with a different driver.



Also a fact that Vettel has spent more time in a dominant car.

Wrong - fact, not opinion. Do not counfuse the two. In the 2009-2012 period, McLaren won 20 races, 12 of which were Hamilton wins and 8 the work of Jenson Button. The closest Lewis has ever come to driving a midfield car was in early 2009, when both Ferrari and McLaren were caught out by the new rules. They both improved massively in the second part of the season.



So, Fact #1 - The 2009-2012 McLarens were race winning cars; Fact #2 - someone other than Hamilton could and indeed DID win races in these cars.



Fact #3 - Vettel had a dominant car for 2 years, Hamilton for 3 years.

Vettel: 2011 and 2013, and he won 4x WDC beating his team mate. In 2010 and 2012 Ferrari was more or less up there, to the point Alonso finished 2nd and challenged for the title. McLaren was also very competitive in 2012. While Red Bull proved to be the best car in these years as well, it wasn't a dominance like in 2011 and 2013.



Hamilton: 2014 to 2016, when unless some disaster happened or some big setup mistake was made, only him and Rosberg had a realistic chance at winning; Last season Merc was still the best but Ferrari posed a challenge. This year, they're more or less evenly matched.



We do agree that neither of them, however, had a lot of real "midfield woes", unlike most other drivers. Sure enough, the best drivers tend to end up in the best cars - because top teams want top drivers, and because they're the ones able to pay the big salaries. Then there is Alonso, but he's an unique case in the history of the sport and he's going to join the likes of Chris Amon and Jean Alesi in the "what could have been..." group (albeit for different reasons).

---

Anyway, my point was punctually demonstrated by these replies, disregarding objective, verifiable and publicly available data as "opinion" - most of the arguments made in here are circumstantial, made up of thin air and based on preference, support and bias. Fanboy arguments, in one word.

Inviere

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Hamilton: 2014 to 2016, when unless some disaster happened or some big setup mistake was made, only him and Rosberg had a realistic chance at winning; Last season Merc was still the best but Ferrari posed a challenge. This year, they're more or less evenly matched.

All true, great post. The only thing I'd add to it is that Lewis had far tougher opposition in Rosberg, than Vettel did with Webber (I say this as a fan of Webber!). Webber, once defeated in 2010, took the biggest back seat going, and never again pushed Seb for the title despite being in the same car. Rosberg had all the tools to beat Lewis, which he eventually did, but it took some doing.

We do agree that neither of them, however, had a lot of real "midfield woes", unlike most other drivers.

Exactly. All of this is to refute the nonsense point that Lewis "has had the best cars all his career", which just isn't the case. Layed out as you have it above, Vettel was very very close to him in how their careers have panned out. Lewis has had good cars all of his career, not necessarily midfield, but not necessarily dominant either. He had a monster of a car from 2014/17, as Vettel did in 11 & 13.

Anyway, my point was punctually demonstrated by these replies, disregarding objective, verifiable and publicly available data as "opinion" - most of the arguments made in here are circumstantial, made up of thin air and based on preference, support and bias. Fanboy arguments, in one word.

I love objective debates, and loathe subjective bias....that stuff belongs in the schoolyard.

H3llR4iser

Inviere wrote: »

All true, great post. The only thing I'd add to it is that Lewis had far tougher opposition in Rosberg, than Vettel did with Webber (I say this as a fan of Webber!). Webber, once defeated in 2010, took the biggest back seat going, and never again pushed Seb for the title despite being in the same car. Rosberg had all the tools to beat Lewis, which he eventually did, but it took some doing.

That's why I did not point out that Hamilton did lose one of the titles while driving a totally dominant car - regardless of Brundle, Sky and Hamilton fans, Nico has been a top class driver. No shame for anybody being beaten by him.

It is however correct to say that indeed both Lewis and Seb DID drive top cars, capable at least of race wins, for the vast majority of their F1 careers so far.

Intersting unrelated thing: amazingly, the one car Vettel drove for a full season (so excluding the BMW) which didn't manage a single race win between its two drivers was 2016's Ferrari. The irony - he won in a freakin' Minardi tarted up as a can of drink, but not in that Ferrari. I don't think many people immediately realize that;)

Inviere

H3llR4iser wrote: »

It is however correct to say that indeed both Lewis and Seb DID drive top cars, capable at least of race wins, for the vast majority of their F1 careers so far.

Top cars suggest championship contenders though, this wasn't always strictly true. Competitive cars yes, at times, top cars yes, at times, dominant cars, yes, at times. Not always one and the same though

Inviere

H3llR4iser wrote: »

regardless of Brundle, Sky and Hamilton fans, Nico has been a top class driver. No shame for anybody being beaten by him.

Just on this, was Brundle harsh on Rosberg? I truthfully don't recall. He's the one voice on Sky I do actually value...

ayux4rj6zql2ph

This post has been deleted.

meeeeh

Inviere wrote: »

I love objective debates, and loathe subjective bias....that stuff belongs in the schoolyard.

Actually all debaters are subjective and there is nothing objective in opinion. While I trust some opinions more than others it is still subjective stuff.

Inviere

meeeeh wrote: »

Actually all debaters are subjective and there is nothing objective in opinion. While I trust some opinions more than others it is still subjective stuff.

I'm talking about people ignoring evidence which flies in the face of their subjective bias, and said people ignoring objective facts.

meeeeh

Prisoner 6753 wrote: »

Brundle is the best commentator out there since Murray Walker retired, my only issue is how he and the rest of Sky treat Hamilton as a god and how dare anyone upset their darling Lewis.

I don't think Brundle is that bad at all but he comes in package with Croft who is.

Inviere

meeeeh wrote: »

I don't think Brundle is that bad at all but he comes in package with Croft who is.

Very much agreed. I find Croft difficult to listen to, and Ted, not sure why, but I've no time for Ted at all. I guess I'm still sore about the breakup of the Brundle, Coulthard, and Jake Humphrey team on BBC....them's were the days

ayux4rj6zql2ph

This post has been deleted.

ayux4rj6zql2ph

This post has been deleted.

Inviere

Prisoner 6753 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I find Lazenby kind of ok, he's just there, unintrusive, if a little flat. That C4 lad though, jesus...he chest bumped the camera at the last C4 race

ayux4rj6zql2ph

This post has been deleted.

Jordan 199

Prisoner 6753 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I enjoyed John Watsons commentary on Eurosport.

AMKC

astrofluff wrote: »

Bit of a shít day hearing that. Very sad. There'll be a dark cloud over motorsport this week. RIP Sergio.

Just seen that news now. Very sad news. He was a great man that done loads for Fiat and Ferrari and has got the Ferrari F1 team competitive again. Going to be a sad Hungaroring race for Ferrari and there fans as well as other motorsport competitors and fans.

skipper_G

Inviere wrote: »

Very much agreed. I find Croft difficult to listen to, and Ted, not sure why, but I've no time for Ted at all. I guess I'm still sore about the breakup of the Brundle, Coulthard, and Jake Humphrey team on BBC....them's were the days

Ted and Croft during free practice sessions are a pair of saps with their 'banter'. And he's very fond of throwing out wild speculation and presenting it as a quasi fact

Inviere

skipper_G wrote: »

And he's very fond of throwing out wild speculation and presenting it as a quasi fact

Very much so, it was him if I recall highlighting the bag of dry ice on the top of the Ferrari FOM airbox camera

Cool_CM

Haha, couldn't get a picture but some of the Trident team were checking into the hotel in front of us. Apparently some dude called Alessio Lorandi will be arriving in the morning...

christy c

Last few pages discussing drivers was a cracking read, thanks to all who contributed

flazio

Inviere wrote: »

Very much so, it was him if I recall highlighting the bag of dry ice on the top of the Ferrari FOM airbox camera

That was Brundle, not Croft.
I've never warmed to Martin Brundle. Mad as it was, I stuck with RTÉ to the end. Didn’t make the switch to ITV when Setanta took over or take up Setanta until about 2014 when the ex RTÉ team were already gone.
I can take or leave the pundits on either channel it's the race where the voice is important and right now, there is no better voice of F1 then Ben Edwards and the really sharp eyes of David Coulthard. (seriously, that man never misses a thing)

Cookie_Monster

Prisoner 6753 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

+1 on this.

A big part of the problem as well seems to be that Sky have told them to commentate like a tabloid rather than a broadsheet. Everything is kept very basic and simple, no real analysis or in depth technical discussion ever occurs. And he initially misses everything that happens, EVERYTHING

skipper_G

Being reported by BBC that James Key will leave Toro Rosso and move to Mclaren as their new technical director. No comment from the teams so far, they're not hanging about the restructuring if true

Frank Bullitt

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/44961301

Confirmed that Key is indeed joining McLaren. Good signing that.

masit

flazio wrote: »

there is no better voice of F1 then Ben Edwards and the really sharp eyes of David Coulthard. (seriously, that man never misses a thing)

I recorded one of the races that was on Sky 1, might have been Monaco. Never finished watching it, switched to channel 4 just for Ben and DC's insight.

H3llR4iser

Inviere wrote: »

Just on this, was Brundle harsh on Rosberg? I truthfully don't recall. He's the one voice on Sky I do actually value...

He was the one constantly banging on about him not being deserving to be a World Champion, albeit in a more lampshaded way. Nico himself jokingly points it out sometimes when he does Sky coverage (I've just found out he works often with Sky Italy, I wonder why...).

As surprising as he sounds, Crofty kept more neutral on the whole thing. He just loves to make noise, and his constant mention of pointless statistics about Hamilton is indeed grating.

Brundle started well with Walker, but he kinda got annoying in later years - his bias is extremely clear and I guess it can indeed be said he was "dragged in" by Crofty's Daily Mail style commentary.

My favourite "Brundlism" remains the claim that mirrors are "as useful as ashtrays", despite overwhelming evidence available now that they aren't - search any of those in-helmet cam clips and take a look

ELM327

H3llR4iser wrote: »

He was the one constantly banging on about him not being deserving to be a World Champion, albeit in a more lampshaded way. Nico himself jokingly points it out sometimes when he does Sky coverage (I've just found out he works often with Sky Italy, I wonder why...).

As surprising as he sounds, Crofty kept more neutral on the whole thing. He just loves to make noise, and his constant mention of pointless statistics about Hamilton is indeed grating.

Brundle started well with Walker, but he kinda got annoying in later years - his bias is extremely clear and I guess it can indeed be said he was "dragged in" by Crofty's Daily Mail style commentary.

My favourite "Brundlism" remains the claim that mirrors are "as useful as ashtrays", despite overwhelming evidence available now that they aren't - search any of those in-helmet cam clips and take a look

The worst of the crofty BS is the "Win 44 in car 44". Thank god that's happened.

ayux4rj6zql2ph

This post has been deleted.