bhallg2k wrote:The graph depicts relative performance, and I know for a fact you're misreading it. From lap 51 until the end, Alonso's pace relative to Hamilton took a dramatic and lengthy nosedive. It's as plain as day, and, of course, it's because Hamilton had fresh tires while Alonso did not. But, relative performance is all that really matters, because one doesn't race against the circuit; one races against other drivers.
I know it's relative. But from lap 51 onwards the reason is nothing to do with a cliff or performance issue with Alonso's tyres, and everything to do with the fact that Hamilton pits for new tyres.
One driver pitting for new tyres does not mean that the other driver's performance suddenly falls off a cliff!! That is not the cliff that everyone is trying to debate! So you've definitely got this arse backwards.
Maybe one of these days your cloth eyes and ears will relay something other than your own subconscious suggestions - "This setup is wicked
I know that the cliff I've described isn't the cliff that's being debated. I never claimed otherwise
. I mentioned something else because, like putting light dressing on a bacon salad or putting on a condom after sex, that
particular cliff couldn't possibly be more meaningless; it's 150% pointless. I have no idea why it was even being addressed.
It would not matter if Alonso's tires had literally fallen off his car and then rolled into a ravine or he suddenly started losing one year
per lap against his own previous lap times. If Hamilton and others were not catching him at the same time, if his relative
performance was the same, what difference does it make?
The simple fact of the matter is, as shown by the graph, that Alonso's relative
performance against Hamilton, the only metric that matters in terms of a race
, fell off a cliff as carelessly as if it had jumped. This information was available to everyone watching and participating in the race and is precisely why Alonso had absolutely no chance of winning. The Ferrari brain trust should have seen it, too.
Instead, it appears they paid attention to the same clueless, dumbass logic that's permeated this discussion and traded a surefire podium for a 5th-place finish.