A conclusion based on race wins says little about car domination.
Easily winning by over 15 seconds even after saftey cars.... Car's dominant.
You are adding another measure, a completely different measure from the previous one. Also one that is inconclusive as at the same time that car also was 3 seconds slower to 2nd.PlatinumZealot wrote: ↑Sat Nov 12, 2022 12:37 pmEasily winning by over 15 seconds even after saftey cars.... Car's dominant.
Like I said, a team consists of two cars. So you are using only half of the data about the car.The fastest drivers can be said to be within a tenth of each other on race pace. If you account for 2 seconds of dirty air... Winning by anything over 6 seconds is signs of a dominant car
And I was simply saying, he is NOW 2nd in the WDC despite admitting the car has been developed more towards Max's preferences i.e. the car is so quick, even someone not happy with it is able to get 2nd in the WDC.Sieper wrote: ↑Fri Nov 11, 2022 12:24 pmHe WASNT second when PZ posted that, he was third at that point. THAT is what I was replying to. He is second now, after the abysmal Ferrari Mexico weekend. Was already explained.west52keep64 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 10, 2022 11:57 pmHe's second in the WDC even after admitted the team developed the car around Max.
The interview can be found here, the question starts at 3:09: https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/s ... -home-fansQ: Do you believe the car was engineered away from you, and towards Max?
Perez: I think probably yeah. You know there are times where some upgrades benefit you more or less, and goes in hand with your driving style. We've seen it with many other [Red Bull] drivers before, so I think the way we develop the car certainly went more in Max's direction. But it's something that as a team we managed to understand it well, and I really hope that together we can avoid these things happening [in the future].
Which does beg to ask the question of whether Merc have been struggling slightly with their calls. Was it Mexico they pitted Lewis to cover off Checo on a fresh set of mediums (where checo started on soft and Lewis Medium). Instead of having a bit of confidence in the pit strategy they immediately covered him off with a hard tyre. That probably would have worked when they were out infront, but now they are 2nd/3rd in the running order its a different scenario for themStu wrote: ↑Sun Nov 20, 2022 11:24 amThe thing is, the pace difference in qualifying is now very close when compared with 2014-2018, on occasions the Mercedes were over a second ahead over one lap compared with ‘best of the rest’ (oftentimes that was the Merc powered Williams); over the course of a race the pace gap was never that big, the strategy tended towards ‘get a pit-stop gap - pit, then manage the gap’. That is no longer an available tactic. Fortunately!!
Yeah fully agreed. Ive always said the RB pitwall is the sharpest on the grid. Even with basic decisions such as tyre choice under a safety car they always go for the fastest tyre to suit the number of laps left (if its a late SC). Mercedes have always been a team who have preferred track position. A tactic that probably 'worked' when their car was faster than the others - even on fresher tyresStu wrote: ↑Sun Nov 20, 2022 12:19 pmI do wonder on that lack of ‘match fitness’ on the pit wall in such circumstances (imo, the LH call was probably correct, but to copy it with GR was a mistake), I also think that is where their correlation/modelling difficulties have come from; previously ‘close, but good enough’ would have been good enough, for this year they really needed ‘good, and as close as possible’ it what was needed. Over the past seven years that is where RedBull have had to work hardest (and where they earned their results) as they didn’t have the underlying pace to win.
It doesn't work like that, he may not be, that still doesn't mean anyone else would beat him does it?