Formula 1 2018: General Discussion Thread

ELM327 wrote: »

Lewis? Arguably, arguably not

Comparing both of their career statistics, negates any argument that Lewis isn't up there.

Same for Max

Unproven perhaps, but he's world class.

Danny is a solid driver but I don't think he will ever be WC (barring a circumstance like Nico's WC)

Counting titles isn't always a sure fire measure of greatness, Danny already blew Seb away in 2014 lest we forget. Yes there's arguments that Seb needed a poor result to secure the move to Ferrari, but I'm not sure that'd account for the year he had.

"Fernando is faster than you" Seb.

"Fernando is faster than you"
"Kimi can you let Sebastion through please"

Meh.

ELM327

Inviere wrote: »

Comparing both of their career statistics, negates any argument that Lewis isn't up there.

"Fernando is faster than you"
"Kimi can you let Sebastion through please"

Meh.

Lewis has only had a couple of years with a midfield car, all the rest of his career he's been in the best car - mostly by miles.

My point with the last remark was that imo a peak alonso beats a peak seb any day. And I'm a vettel fan

skipper_G

ELM327 wrote: »

Lewis has only had a couple of years with a midfield car, all the rest of his career he's been in the best car - mostly by miles.

My point with the last remark was that imo a peak alonso beats a peak seb any day. And I'm a vettel fan

I'm not a Hamilton fan, but anyone who claims he's not included in the greats just make themselves look silly. 4 World titles, the most pole positions and the second most race wins of all time say you're wrong

meeeeh

Inviere wrote: »

Comparing both of their career statistics, negates any argument that Lewis isn't up there.

Unproven perhaps, but he's world class.

Counting titles isn't always a sure fire measure of greatness, Danny already blew Seb away in 2014 lest we forget. Yes there's arguments that Seb needed a poor result to secure the move to Ferrari, but I'm not sure that'd account for the year he had.

"Fernando is faster than you"
"Kimi can you let Sebastion through please"

Meh.

Seb clocked our that season and only applied himself when racing Alonso for 7th position or something similar. There were some entertaining squabbles between them. Drivers can be beaten by their teammate (Hamilton twice) but as a team lead driver I would prefer Vettel to Ricardo. Red Bull similarly seem to prefer Jos Jr. I also don't consider Button or Rosberg better than Hamilton.

Vettel is a good driver, he is not above the rest. I think there are a few drivers quite evenly matched, but all with different individual strengths.

Frank Bullitt

vectra wrote: »

And?
what has that got to do with todays cars?
And if Danni is so good then why is he not beating the socks off of Max?

Has nothing to do with todays cars, where was it said that it had to?

Dani is proper good, his Monaco drive this year plays testament to that.

ELM327

skipper_G wrote: »

I'm not a Hamilton fan, but anyone who claims he's not included in the greats just make themselves look silly. 4 World titles, the most pole positions and the second most race wins of all time say you're wrong

Where he has had the best car for at least 75% of his career, and in a sport where there are now 1.5 times the number of races there were not 20 years ago (I remember the addition of a 17th race in the 90's), such statistics are meaningless.

If Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Fangio had 20+ races each year instead of 12-16 then the stats would be equal.

If you divide hamilton's wins by 1.5 to allow for the increased opportunity each season he doesn't look so good. And that doesn't account for him always having the best car.

My estimation of hamilton went down hugely when he lost a WC to a mediocre driver like Rosberg.

Charlie-Bravo

Leclerc to get everything right this weekend, and be on the podium while the top teams trip over themselves panicking.

Hulkenberg taking the most ultrasofts into the weekend with 10 sets. Two of the medium and one of the softs. No supersofts for this race.

ELM327 wrote: »

Lewis has only had a couple of years with a midfield car, all the rest of his career he's been in the best car - mostly by miles.

As opposed to Vettel's (not counting reserve and 3rd drives) mere two years in a mid field Torro Rosso, before moving to a massively competitive RB for 2009, and been in championship winning and contending cars since? C'mon...

ELM327 wrote: »

My estimation of hamilton went down hugely when he lost a WC to a mediocre driver like Rosberg.

His awful reliability in 2016 not playing any part at all of course. Sorry man, but you're talking garbage. Nobody here is claiming he's the best ever, the point was he's in the same league as Vettel...to deny this is just plain silly

ELM327 wrote: »

Where he has had the best car for at least 75% of his career, and in a sport where there are now 1.5 times the number of races there were not 20 years ago (I remember the addition of a 17th race in the 90's), such statistics are meaningless.

2007
Went into a car that didn’t win a race the year before. Nearly became champion with the Ferrari at least equal.
2008
Became champion with the Ferrari equal
2009
Third best car, miles away from the Brawn and behind the RedBull still managed a win
2010
Third best car, into the championship hunt till the last race
2011
Third best car, still won
2012
Third best car, still won
2013
Moved to a team that won a race in 2012, third strongest team maybe, won
2014-2018
In the best team, only beaten by this team mate in 2016
Every season in the top 5

Debatable but 40% in best car, 20% against comparable cars and 40% in underdeveloped cars.

ELM327 wrote: »

If Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Fangio had 20+ races each year instead of 12-16 then the stats would be equal.

If you divide hamilton's wins by 1.5 to allow for the increased opportunity each season he doesn't look so good. And that doesn't account for him always having the best car.

My estimation of hamilton went down hugely when he lost a WC to a mediocre driver like Rosberg.

You don't have to divide by something, just look at the win percentage here: https://www.driverdb.com/championships/statistics/formula-1/
Removing the Indy racers, he is 4th behind Fangio, Ascari and Clarke.

Harika with the cold hard facts

This post has been deleted.

JPF82

ELM327 wrote: »

Where he has had the best car for at least 75% of his career, and in a sport where there are now 1.5 times the number of races there were not 20 years ago (I remember the addition of a 17th race in the 90's), such statistics are meaningless.

If Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Fangio had 20+ races each year instead of 12-16 then the stats would be equal.

If you divide hamilton's wins by 1.5 to allow for the increased opportunity each season he doesn't look so good. And that doesn't account for him always having the best car.

My estimation of hamilton went down hugely when he lost a WC to a mediocre driver like Rosberg.

Ah here. Rosberg was a decent driver and apart from Lewis having engine failure while leading in Malaysia, a race in which Rosberg was 5th, Lewis would have won the title that year too.

Over criticising Rosberg to further knock Hamilton. Well, if that's how you want to do it...

All the best drivers get the best cars too. Fangio had team mates that would give up their cars for him mid race, back when that was allowed. Senna and Prost, massive car advantage there at Mclaren. Seconds per lap faster than the next team. Ditto the Mansell title in 92 and Prost in 93 with Williams. Schumacher had lapdog teammates. Buttons title, blown diffuser so only beat barrichello. He should be embarrassed by calling himself a world champion. I jest of course.

meeeeh

Harika wrote: »

2007
Went into a car that didn’t win a race the year before. Nearly became champion with the Ferrari at least equal.
2008
Became champion with the Ferrari equal

I think McLaren was a better car in 2007, it was the of track stuff that lost them the championship. 2008 Kimi didn't apply himself at all and the championship should be a walk over against Massa.

That being said Hamilton is a good driver just not as great as some British journalists like to imply. He is probably fastest over one lap and best in wet, but he has weekends where he clocks out. The year Rosberg won, it wasn't just mechanical problems that list him championship against inferior driver.

This post has been deleted.

This post has been deleted.

meeeeh

Prisoner 6753 wrote: »

That McLaren was pretty much a Ferrari in possession of a different team.

Hehehe.. that was probably one of the most entertaining seasons if you are not a McLaren fan.

skipper_G

ELM327 wrote: »

Where he has had the best car for at least 75% of his career, and in a sport where there are now 1.5 times the number of races there were not 20 years ago (I remember the addition of a 17th race in the 90's), such statistics are meaningless.

If Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Fangio had 20+ races each year instead of 12-16 then the stats would be equal.

If you divide hamilton's wins by 1.5 to allow for the increased opportunity each season he doesn't look so good. And that doesn't account for him always having the best car.

My estimation of hamilton went down hugely when he lost a WC to a mediocre driver like Rosberg.

:rolleyes: You're further illustrating how ridiculous you're making yourself look. One doesn't simply win a World Title by accident, and you definitely don't win a World title by being mediocre.

Prisoner 6753 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Frecking Kids

For 2007: https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/5k9dtz/oc_analysis_2007_formula_1_qualifying_by_fastest/

Mostly lost because of McLaren's inability to deal with the drivers. Still Hamilton was a rookie then, hard to blame him there.

And for Rosberg being a nose driller, he defeated Schumacher (Didn’t win anything, seems to be some kind of paydriver no one can remember) in the three seasons together at Mercedes. Even when Schumacher was beyond his prime and couldn’t handle the new generation of cars, hard to not give Rosberg credit for that.

JPF82

Prisoner 6753 wrote: »

No point in if's and but's.

If Hamilton didn't slide off in China 2007 or didn't have mechanical issues in Brazil he'd have been champion.

If Hamilton didn't pass Glock in Brazil 2008 Massa would've been champion.

Malaysia was Malaysia

You know yourself, these are just facts of life.

Oh agreed. Rosberg deserved that title.

This post has been deleted.

Ghost Train

Thinking of Rosbergs title, when's the last time before that, that a teammate of a world champion won the title.

I do find it difficult to see Bottas making that step up to challenge Hamilton more regularly. Maybe next year. Or maybe Mercedes might bring in a new driver eventually, I did find it easier to like Rosberg in the Mercedes

Ghost Train wrote: »

Thinking of Rosbergs title, when's the last time before that, that a teammate of a world champion won the title.

Prost 1985 with Lauda.
Prost 1986 with Rosberg
Senna 1988 with Prost
Prost 1989 with Senna

H3llR4iser

Ghost Train wrote: »

Thinking of Rosbergs title, when's the last time before that, that a teammate of a world champion won the title.

Senna as Prost's team mate in 1988, to be specific; And before that...Prost in 1985 as Lauda's team mate. That adds Rosberg to a very restricted list of illustrious list of very "mediocre" names.

(as in non-champions winning their first title; If a team has two world champions, you'd assume they'd be more or less on equal footing)

Ghost Train wrote: »

I do find it difficult to see Bottas making that step up to challenge Hamilton more regularly. Maybe next year. Or maybe Mercedes might bring in a new driver eventually, I did find it easier to like Rosberg in the Mercedes

Bottas has put in some brilliant performances, but he is not allowed to challenge for the title, full stop - last race should have dispelled any doubts.

When you have both Raikkonen and Verstappen behind you on fresh tires, you don't tell your own driver on new tires to "maintain position" behind the one with worn rubber, with a risk of both being overtaken, unless you are desperately protecting the position of the team leader.

To this day I'm fairly sure Mercedes weren't fully happy about Rosberg winning in 2016 - they more or less found themselves in a situation they dind't think possible and had to "roll with the punches". I have a feeling this atmosphere in the team was a factor in Rosberg's decision to retire.

Ghost Train wrote: »

I do find it difficult to see Bottas making that step up to challenge Hamilton more regularly. Maybe next year. Or maybe Mercedes might bring in a new driver eventually, I did find it easier to like Rosberg in the Mercedes

Mercedes have more than likely adopted a clear 1-2 driver lineup model, after the utter headaches that were caused by Hamilton/Rosberg. Bottas' role at Merc will be to pick up Constructor points first, and wins if and only if Lewis isn't ahead of him. That might change at the beginning of a season, when things are more level and team orders are far more frowned upon than they are from midway on though, but I still can't see it.

skipper_G

Inviere wrote: »

Mercedes have more than likely adopted a clear 1-2 driver lineup model, after the utter headaches that were caused by Hamilton/Rosberg. Bottas' role at Merc will be to pick up Constructor points first, and wins if and only if Lewis isn't ahead of him. That might change at the beginning of a season, when things are more level and team orders are far more frowned upon than they are from midway on though, but I still can't see it.

The thing about Bottas, he's a solid F1 driver and nothing more. I have seen no evidence of a killer instinct or X factor that typically we see in champions (potential or otherwise). He sounded like he was exactly where he belonged when he complied so meekly with the team order on Sunday "copy James"

skipper_G wrote: »

The thing about Bottas, he's a solid F1 driver and nothing more. I have seen no evidence of a killer instinct or X factor that typically we see in champions (potential or otherwise). He sounded like he was exactly where he belonged when he complied so meekly with the team order on Sunday "copy James"

Agreed. I like the guy, he seems like the perfect wingman to have, I'm not sure he has what it takes to mix it with Vettel etc though. In fairness to him though, we'll probably never know as long as he's playing a supporting role. The only chance for him is to constantly try to out qualify Lewis, and not go backwards.

g1983d

Inviere wrote: »

Agreed. I like the guy, he seems like the perfect wingman to have, I'm not sure he has what it takes to mix it with Vettel etc though. In fairness to him though, we'll probably never know as long as he's playing a supporting role. The only chance for him is to constantly try to out qualify Lewis, and not go backwards.

Thing with Bottas is, he desperately wants to be able to compete on even ground but bad luck and a deficit on skill to the very top drivers is the reason he's not.
Imagine if he was still at Williams, we'd be probably saying he's not a great driver and lucky to be in F1