2015 Mexican Grand Prix - Mexico City, Oct 30 - Nov 1

[MercedesAMGSpy]

Just to quickly point out Monza out of the list. It can't be on the 'list'. On the most power-dependent circuit of the calendar, Rosberg ran the whole weekend (minus FP1 iirc) with a significant engine handicap. Since Mercedes is in a class of its own, dominating when you don't have any opponent in at least similar machinery is a no-brainer. And yes, it seems that Hamilton took it a just a bit easier in the second part of the season. I am no fan of his, but the championship was pretty much done and dusted. We saw last year how he battled it out.

In any case, although his talent is indisputable, I seriously question his education and emotional intelligence. The way he creates useless controversy and bad vibe around himself out of absolutely nothing is mind boggling. The cap incident with Rosberg, the interview regarding Michael, the things he said about how Mercedes 'warmed up' towards Robserg. What was the point of all that? He was out-paced all weekend in Mexico, why can't he just accept it was down to him and move on?

He can say what he wants and that the Schumacher fans don't like it, that's their problem. I think Rubens Barrichello would agree with his comments.

[alexx_88]

Even if it were true it's called lack of tact on one hand, something he proved a number of times. He suggested that he (LH) won through natural ability, whereas Michael didn't. However, those words are not just disrespectful (considering Michael's situation), but also untrue, considering the amount of people in the paddock who said the exact opposite, one of them being Irvine. So yeah, disrespectful, untrue and pointless.

[ChrisM40]

Michael won through both talent and dirty tricks. There is no doubt that he wanted the dominant position in the team, to the point that the car was designed for him, this is a Ferrari tactic, they did it for Alonso as well, and the less said about the integrity of Benetton the better.... However Michael was also a dirtier than most drives on the track to. Call it ruthless if you like, but his tactics are not permissible any more in F1, driver standards are expected to be higher now.

His condition, while tragic, doesn't make him immune to criticism.

[Writinglife]

Schumacher not only had the intense drive to be World Champion, he also understood the sport better than most. He understood what it would take and with Brawn and Todt he built a winning team around him. Sadly, this meant that his success led to increased leverage against team-mates and thus he received updates and preferential strategy calls.

It's true that in some moments, his drive to win overcame his sporting side and he made moves that didn't have a place in the sport.

I agree with the thoughts that his career will always be up for debate. You will get those who loved him and those that hated him. His current medical situation is saddening and I truly hope that his recovery continues and that one day we will see him in public again, and maybe even in the Mercedes or Ferrari garage as a visitor.

Comments about his career should be taken as that, not as attacks on a man that can't defend himself, but criticisms on a man who broke all the records in the sport and dominated for a length period of time. Talented, Intelligent, Spirited and Ruthless.

[basti313]

But you wan't to completely disregard all the weekends where he's completely outpaced Rosberg? Because they had no bearing on the championship what so ever? Monza for example, completely flawless and in a class of one. Monaco, also totally flawless, gifted to Rosberg by a team error. So many races this year and last year where Hamilton has just cruised up to Rosberg and driven past him.

Well, there were weekends where anyone of the two outpaced the other. Your examples are not really good, Monza in equal cars would have been like Mexico with both Mercs flying away, Monaco this year looked like a not really good setup as 0.3sec stable between the two drivers is rather not their usual speed difference in Q.
We have been robbed a nice, close championship this year. No way to raise Ham up to Senna worship with this gifted WC for me. Last year he was unlucky but good, this year I would call lucky but mediocre as I see Rosberg not in the same class as "the best of the best".

[GPR-A duplicate2]

Just to quickly point out Monza out of the list. It can't be on the 'list'. On the most power-dependent circuit of the calendar, Rosberg ran the whole weekend (minus FP1 iirc) with a significant engine handicap. Since Mercedes is in a class of its own, dominating when you don't have any opponent in at least similar machinery is a no-brainer. And yes, it seems that Hamilton took it a just a bit easier in the second part of the season. I am no fan of his, but the championship was pretty much done and dusted. We saw last year how he battled it out.

In any case, although his talent is indisputable, I seriously question his education and emotional intelligence. The way he creates useless controversy and bad vibe around himself out of absolutely nothing is mind boggling. The cap incident with Rosberg, the interview regarding Michael, the things he said about how Mercedes 'warmed up' towards Robserg. What was the point of all that? He was out-paced all weekend in Mexico, why can't he just accept it was down to him and move on?

He can say what he wants and that the Schumacher fans don't like it, that's their problem. I think Rubens Barrichello would agree with his comments.

People who like Lewis Hamilton, clearly know the kind of personality that he is. I am a fan of MS and Lewis both, but I have a clear disregard for Lewis Hamilton the person as I only like what he does on track. My respect for MS goes beyond the track for what he did with Ferrari and the legacy he left with them. Is it that tough to disregard what Lewis says, fully knowing his emotional and media intelligence, or lack of it?

Oh, Rubens Barrichello was just an ordinary driver who people remember because he drove for Ferrari. It doesn't really matter if he agrees with what Lewis says or not. I felt sad for him when he said, one of Michael's 5 championships with Ferrari belonged to him. A lot of mindless people say, Michael was given a No. 1 status and his partner never had the right to fight. But when challenged, they clearly fail to produce evidence of HOW MANY times the partner driver gave up his position and allowed Michael to pass or HOW MANY times he was right behind Michael and if he had the right, he would have passed Michael. HOW MANY times his partner finished right next to Michael in Championship standings. One or two stray incidents in a career spanning 10 years at Ferrari doesn't count for much.

Anyways, the point is, ignore what Lewis says and enjoy his driving. Just because he said some BS doesn't mean MS' legacy would become any lesser. #KeepFightingMichael.

Shouldn't this discussion be moved to Mercedes team thread?

[Jordan44]

Just to quickly point out Monza out of the list. It can't be on the 'list'. On the most power-dependent circuit of the calendar, Rosberg ran the whole weekend (minus FP1 iirc) with a significant engine handicap. Since Mercedes is in a class of its own, dominating when you don't have any opponent in at least similar machinery is a no-brainer. And yes, it seems that Hamilton took it a just a bit easier in the second part of the season. I am no fan of his, but the championship was pretty much done and dusted. We saw last year how he battled it out.

In any case, although his talent is indisputable, I seriously question his education and emotional intelligence. The way he creates useless controversy and bad vibe around himself out of absolutely nothing is mind boggling. The cap incident with Rosberg, the interview regarding Michael, the things he said about how Mercedes 'warmed up' towards Robserg. What was the point of all that? He was out-paced all weekend in Mexico, why can't he just accept it was down to him and move on?

It still deserves to be on the list since he topped FP1, FP2, FP3, Q1, Q2, Q3, fastest lap, and won by 25 seconds. Unheard of in the history of Formula One. Lowe said Rosberg's engine was down a tenth or so on Hamilton. If we believe him, then Rosberg simply did a poor job on Saturday and his race was ruined by being stuck in traffic. The fact Ham only got pole by 3 tenths to the Ferrari on his new engine shows this. If we apply the pace gaps between the two Mercs we saw in practise, then Rosberg's grid position was representative once Ferrari got their act together. It was still a stunning performance and he would have won for sure. Many said at the time no one would have beaten him that weekend, new engine or not.

vettel was on the far left of the track, and cut straight across to try and hit the apex on the right.
while vettel was on the curb on the left, ricciardo already had an overlap.

it seems to be simple common sense that you don't try to take the racing line through the first corner, you always leave some space. every other driver left enough space there.
if Vettel had got through that without a puncture, i'm sure he would have been given a penalty. as it is, the puncture was penalty enough

After replays I changed my mind, Vettel did a bit of Hulkenberg Singapore, not the same since he was earlier and on the better line but still. It wasn't good line-speed combination from Ricciardo either, see Massa - Bottas behind, IMO more his fault so I disagree about any penalties for Vettel this but time stewards were right not to touch it.

Don't even start me with Hamilton, I will leave it at that: I'd be ashamed if I were his supporter. Out-qualified four times in a row, won Russia only because of Rosberg bizarre car problems, Japan only because of car problems and getting away with dirty driving, USA - dirty driving, two safety cars after getting outpaced (10 seconds behind after 20 something laps) and yes Rosberg's mistake, championship on a silver plate for free through decision making and remarkable reliability and now he forgets all that and questions very simple race where he was outpaced every second of the weekend ?

If you don't think USA and Japan were dirty re-watch Magnussen vs Alonso/Bottas, Spa/Monza '14, 20 s = full drive-through and 5 s for less (not the best attempts) in comparison to no investigation for pushing off twice on purpose - Japan less than 50/50 and USA LH was in front anyway and did it only to send NR off track, that was not position defending

Once again totally disregarding the rest of the season. As I said, the roles regarding bad luck were reversed last year and Hamilton lost as many points as Rosberg has this season up until Singapore. Yet somehow the gap Hamilton had at that point was still less than 25 points. Rosberg suffers the same bad luck and ends up 70+ points adrift. Why? Because Hamilton has been the better driver over the course of the season anyway. I feel so sorry for you as a Hamilton hater, I can see you're getting as desperate as Rosberg is.

[Kingshark]

It still deserves to be on the list since he topped FP1, FP2, FP3, Q1, Q2, Q3, fastest lap, and won by 25 seconds. Unheard of in the history of Formula One. Lowe said Rosberg's engine was down a tenth or so on Hamilton. If we believe him, then Rosberg simply did a poor job on Saturday and his race was ruined by being stuck in traffic. The fact Ham only got pole by 3 tenths to the Ferrari on his new engine shows this. If we apply the pace gaps between the two Mercs we saw in practise, then Rosberg's grid position was representative once Ferrari got their act together. It was still a stunning performance and he would have won for sure. Many said at the time no one would have beaten him that weekend, new engine or not.

There's no way the old engine was only down by 0.1 seconds. Sky did a side-by-side comparison between Hamilton and Rosberg, and Hamilton gained significantly more than 0.1 seconds down the straight. Rosberg gained through corners, and even they believed that Rosberg would have been on pole with equal engines.

Here's a comparison between Hamilton and Raikkonen, and it shows that Hamilton's final lap in Q3 was rather scruffy poor. He should have been much more than 0.2 seconds in front of that Ferrari, IMO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZI1qeaBvq9Y

Yes, Lewis did top FP1 and FP2, as if that means anything. He also topped FP3 and each qualifying session, probably because his teammate was in a very old engine, and he had a very dominant car over the rest of the field.

Absolutely no reason to count Monza in favor of Lewis. At best it was a non-score, like Russia.

I would say that so far this season, Rosberg has been faster than Hamilton on 5 or 6 weekends. Spain, Austria and Mexico are the obvious ones. In Russia, he tonked Lewis in qualifying but never got a fair chance in the race. USA he was clearly faster but messed up and the SC gifted the race to Hamilton. I'm also inclined to say he was faster in Silverstone, although Lewis did win fair and square.

[Jordan44]

It still deserves to be on the list since he topped FP1, FP2, FP3, Q1, Q2, Q3, fastest lap, and won by 25 seconds. Unheard of in the history of Formula One. Lowe said Rosberg's engine was down a tenth or so on Hamilton. If we believe him, then Rosberg simply did a poor job on Saturday and his race was ruined by being stuck in traffic. The fact Ham only got pole by 3 tenths to the Ferrari on his new engine shows this. If we apply the pace gaps between the two Mercs we saw in practise, then Rosberg's grid position was representative once Ferrari got their act together. It was still a stunning performance and he would have won for sure. Many said at the time no one would have beaten him that weekend, new engine or not.

There's no way the old engine was only down by 0.1 seconds. Sky did a side-by-side comparison between Hamilton and Rosberg, and Hamilton gained significantly more than 0.1 seconds down the straight. Rosberg gained through corners, and even they believed that Rosberg would have been on pole with equal engines.

Here's a comparison between Hamilton and Raikkonen, and it shows that Hamilton's final lap in Q3 was rather scruffy poor. He should have been much more than 0.2 seconds in front of that Ferrari, IMO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZI1qeaBvq9Y

Yes, Lewis did top FP1 and FP2, as if that means anything. He also topped FP3 and each qualifying session, probably because his teammate was in a very old engine, and he had a very dominant car over the rest of the field.

Absolutely no reason to count Monza in favor of Lewis. At best it was a non-score, like Russia.

I would say that so far this season, Rosberg has been faster than Hamilton on 5 or 6 weekends. Spain, Austria and Mexico are the obvious ones. In Russia, he tonked Lewis in qualifying but never got a fair chance in the race. USA he was clearly faster but messed up and the SC gifted the race to Hamilton. I'm also inclined to say he was faster in Silverstone, although Lewis did win fair and square.

I'll still take Paddy Lowe's word for this over yours and Sky, until you show me the evidence from the video, baring in mind Lowe also knows how much they supposedly turned down Lewis's engine.

And in Silverstone, Nico was faster than him for what, 10 laps out of the 50? Why should that be included?

[basti313]

It still deserves to be on the list since he topped FP1, FP2, FP3, Q1, Q2, Q3, fastest lap, and won by 25 seconds. Unheard of in the history of Formula One. Lowe said Rosberg's engine was down a tenth or so on Hamilton. If we believe him, then Rosberg simply did a poor job on Saturday and his race was ruined by being stuck in traffic. The fact Ham only got pole by 3 tenths to the Ferrari on his new engine shows this. If we apply the pace gaps between the two Mercs we saw in practise, then Rosberg's grid position was representative once Ferrari got their act together. It was still a stunning performance and he would have won for sure. Many said at the time no one would have beaten him that weekend, new engine or not.

There's no way the old engine was only down by 0.1 seconds. Sky did a side-by-side comparison between Hamilton and Rosberg, and Hamilton gained significantly more than 0.1 seconds down the straight. Rosberg gained through corners, and even they believed that Rosberg would have been on pole with equal engines.

Yes. Ferrari even put a new engine into the car for the US GP for grid penalty. They would not do this if it would not give them several tenth and in Monza you can expect even more. Maybe even a second. Plus Hams engine was turned down in Q according to Rosberg.
Nevertheless both Merc drivers did not do a good job in Q3. The lap of Ham was obviously poor as you can see from the onboard and Ros messed up in Sector 2. A nice example for the Q performance of the Merc drivers this year, there is no Q3 lap without an obvious fault. The only question is who is making more faults...
Maybe this is the result of a car that can be a second quicker than the rest...

I would say that so far this season, Rosberg has been faster than Hamilton on 5 or 6 weekends. Spain, Austria and Mexico are the obvious ones. In Russia, he tonked Lewis in qualifying but never got a fair chance in the race. USA he was clearly faster but messed up and the SC gifted the race to Hamilton. I'm also inclined to say he was faster in Silverstone, although Lewis did win fair and square.

I see it the same way. There was nothing like an astonishing performance...very mediocre season so far. But maybe this is also a result of a car that is so fast that the only question is, who is winning the first corner and who is running into problems with tires, brakes or engine...

[Jordan44]

It still deserves to be on the list since he topped FP1, FP2, FP3, Q1, Q2, Q3, fastest lap, and won by 25 seconds. Unheard of in the history of Formula One. Lowe said Rosberg's engine was down a tenth or so on Hamilton. If we believe him, then Rosberg simply did a poor job on Saturday and his race was ruined by being stuck in traffic. The fact Ham only got pole by 3 tenths to the Ferrari on his new engine shows this. If we apply the pace gaps between the two Mercs we saw in practise, then Rosberg's grid position was representative once Ferrari got their act together. It was still a stunning performance and he would have won for sure. Many said at the time no one would have beaten him that weekend, new engine or not.

There's no way the old engine was only down by 0.1 seconds. Sky did a side-by-side comparison between Hamilton and Rosberg, and Hamilton gained significantly more than 0.1 seconds down the straight. Rosberg gained through corners, and even they believed that Rosberg would have been on pole with equal engines.

Yes. Ferrari even put a new engine into the car for the US GP for grid penalty. They would not do this if it would not give them several tenth and in Monza you can expect even more. Maybe even a second. Plus Hams engine was turned down in Q according to Rosberg.
Nevertheless both Merc drivers did not do a good job in Q3. The lap of Ham was obviously poor as you can see from the onboard and Ros messed up in Sector 2. A nice example for the Q performance of the Merc drivers this year, there is no Q3 lap without an obvious fault. The only question is who is making more faults...
Maybe this is the result of a car that can be a second quicker than the rest...

I would say that so far this season, Rosberg has been faster than Hamilton on 5 or 6 weekends. Spain, Austria and Mexico are the obvious ones. In Russia, he tonked Lewis in qualifying but never got a fair chance in the race. USA he was clearly faster but messed up and the SC gifted the race to Hamilton. I'm also inclined to say he was faster in Silverstone, although Lewis did win fair and square.

I see it the same way. There was nothing like an astonishing performance...very mediocre season so far. But maybe this is also a result of a car that is so fast that the only question is, who is winning the first corner and who is running into problems with tires, brakes or engine...

I would hope not, because there is no such thing as a perfect lap and no driver every achieves them, but this one was close:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6Ttzm_lo70

[basti313]

I would hope not, because there is no such thing as a perfect lap and no driver every achieves them, but this one was close:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6Ttzm_lo70

Well, if we count oversteer before the long straight and a well missed apex close to a perfect lap...

There were seasons in F1 when missing an apex in Q in the best car meant to be P2. The last one was 2010 when Vet and Web had some incredible close battles in Q3 with not a single obvious fault in the lap for P1.

I would really appreciate to see such a battle between Ros and Ham and I thing both would be capable for that if they would have a more or less good season.

[Kingshark]

I'll still take Paddy Lowe's word for this over yours and Sky, until you show me the evidence from the video, baring in mind Lowe also knows how much they supposedly turned down Lewis's engine.

There's no way a 7 race old engine is only 0.1 seconds slower than a fresh engine around Monza, this is downright nonsense to anyone who understands this sport. Lowe probably said so because he wanted to make it seem that the result would not have been any different regardless of whether or not Mercedes's reliability failed Rosberg.

Btw, when Wolff said after Brazil 2014 that Rosberg had the race entirely under control, I called bull as well, because Lewis was clearly faster; and just because a teamboss said otherwise does not erase the truth.

And in Silverstone, Nico was faster than him for what, 10 laps out of the 50? Why should that be included?

He was stuck behind the Williams cars for about 35 laps. As soon as he got passed, he was clearly faster than Hamilton and everyone else. He ate into a 10 second gap and turned it into almost nothing just before Lewis pitted. Just because Hamilton won that race does not mean he was faster.

I would hope not, because there is no such thing as a perfect lap and no driver every achieves them,

Hamilton did not lose any time to Raikkonen on the straights because his engine was supposedly detuned. He gained time down the straights, and lost some time to Raikkonen through the corners where he made some mistakes and had a scruffy lap in general.

[Hammer44]

It still deserves to be on the list since he topped FP1, FP2, FP3, Q1, Q2, Q3, fastest lap, and won by 25 seconds. Unheard of in the history of Formula One. Lowe said Rosberg's engine was down a tenth or so on Hamilton. If we believe him, then Rosberg simply did a poor job on Saturday and his race was ruined by being stuck in traffic. The fact Ham only got pole by 3 tenths to the Ferrari on his new engine shows this. If we apply the pace gaps between the two Mercs we saw in practise, then Rosberg's grid position was representative once Ferrari got their act together. It was still a stunning performance and he would have won for sure. Many said at the time no one would have beaten him that weekend, new engine or not.

There's no way the old engine was only down by 0.1 seconds. Sky did a side-by-side comparison between Hamilton and Rosberg, and Hamilton gained significantly more than 0.1 seconds down the straight. Rosberg gained through corners, and even they believed that Rosberg would have been on pole with equal engines.

Here's a comparison between Hamilton and Raikkonen, and it shows that Hamilton's final lap in Q3 was rather scruffy poor. He should have been much more than 0.2 seconds in front of that Ferrari, IMO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZI1qeaBvq9Y

Yes, Lewis did top FP1 and FP2, as if that means anything. He also topped FP3 and each qualifying session, probably because his teammate was in a very old engine, and he had a very dominant car over the rest of the field.

Absolutely no reason to count Monza in favor of Lewis. At best it was a non-score, like Russia.

I would say that so far this season, Rosberg has been faster than Hamilton on 5 or 6 weekends. Spain, Austria and Mexico are the obvious ones. In Russia, he tonked Lewis in qualifying but never got a fair chance in the race. USA he was clearly faster but messed up and the SC gifted the race to Hamilton. I'm also inclined to say he was faster in Silverstone, although Lewis did win fair and square.

I don't know what you were watching to say it was a scruffy lap. Hamilton only made a slight mistake at the second chicane otherwise it was a pretty good lap.

[Moose]

Yeh sorry, I don't see what's "scruffy" about that. He hooks up every single apex. The only thing I can see that could have been minutely better is that he could have been half a foot wider on the exit of Ascari.