Why hamilton is so good at overtaking

[bhall]

That Singapore pounce on Webber, it's success undone by Webber, was a very nice move because of the events leading up to it. Hamilton made a split second decision with the timing of that "pounce."

He took himself out of the race! There was nothing successful about it, much less quality.

I'll admit to seeing things from time to time through rosso-tinted glasses, but I think it's absurd to call that move on Webber anything other than a self-inflicted disaster.

[SiLo]

I think a lot of this discussion is just wasting each others time, the general assumption is the man is a great overtaker for a host of reasons, and that is that.

[Donuts]

So it seems Webber has actually been better at overtaking in 2011 than Hamilton.
Here's the count thusfar..


Webber 39
Buemi 36
Button 35
Kobayashi 32
Di Resta 29
Alguersuari 29
Massa 28
Heidfeld 26
Rosberg 25
Sutil 24
Perez 24
Barrichello 22
Maldonado 22
Hamilton 20
Petrov 20
Alonso 14


Source: YallaF1

This says it all! Top three car with driver(Webber) that does'nt manage to qualify in a good position or does'nt manage a good start or is let down by the team in a pitstop! Then "rushes" thru the field to make the most takeovers. End of story.

Gimme a Kubica highlight reel man. Let's see what he has.

It would be almost as boring as Vettel's. This is exactly what I'm trying to say, when you qualify where the car should be, you don't have many opportunities to do any takeovers. This year it's changed to some extent due to DRS and tyres. Kubica put the car where it should be in qualifying 16 out of 19 times(Hungary, Brazil(only qualifying misstake of the season in the wet) and Abu Dhabi). This labeled him as a boring driver compared to Hamilton. When for some reason something went wrong he did a lot of overtaking, remember Bahrain, South Korea and Singapore? The thing is that even thou he made a lot of overtakes, there's only his original position(read above) he can get back to in most cases.

[Donuts]

What textbook are we talking about? The one Robert Kubica used in Singapore 2010?

Kubica's car was one second faster at the time.. and Sutil Yielded... but that is another discussion.

A quality overtake is one that is difficult to perform. (We have seen Hamilton string together overtakes that took multiple turns to compile).

That Singapore pounce on Webber, it's success undone by Webber, was a very nice move because of the events leading up to it. Hamilton made a split second decision with the timing of that "pounce."

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ynp28-jt8J0[/youtube]

I was just teasing, but since you took it seriously... I don't want to make this into a Kubica vs. Hamilton, it's all about what I wrote in the earlier posts. Kubica is just and example, it could just as well be Rosberg.

Kubica's overtakes in Singapore? They were not difficult to perform? So why did Hamilton not managed to overtake Webber? He took a chance when Webber made a misstake, that's what he does, takes a lot of chances. How much faster was he than Webber at that time? Kubica bided his time, saved his tyres and then started overtaking. Textbook! =D>

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYMeSlWp5jw[/youtube]

[PlatinumZealot]

[...]

That overtake was completed before the accident. What I like about it was that Hamilton saw that a Virgin(?) was in front of Webber just* but only just* before the saftey car line. And within the fraction of a second he calculated that Webber would have difficulties passing the Virgin in front while at the same time defending from behind and to the right. Hamilton said "OK... even though the dirty line is on the right, Webber will be slowed by the Virgin, so I can get up close to get a slip stream and if I put the car on the dirty line I can still make it around him and close down the line before the corner."

If this move was textbook, why didn't Webber see it before it happened? It was so easy to defend against. In Kubica's case, there was no safety car and his car was faster and Sutil yielded anyway. Was it cleaner and more successful? Yes I think so, but it wasn't as difficult. Less pressure involved as well.

[raymondu999]

It would be almost as boring as Vettel's. This is exactly what I'm trying to say, when you qualify where the car should be, you don't have many opportunities to do any takeovers.

Absolutely fascinating point you bring up there; and very true. If you're putting your car on the absolute limit in qualifying, then you can only go slower rather than faster, in the race. Especially before the first pitstops; when everyone is on the (roughly) same level of fuel and tyre wear. Does anyone have stats of who is most/least overtaken or most/least overtakes in the series of laps running up to the very first (planned) pitstop of the race?

[Donuts]

It would be almost as boring as Vettel's. This is exactly what I'm trying to say, when you qualify where the car should be, you don't have many opportunities to do any takeovers.

Absolutely fascinating point you bring up there; and very true. If you're putting your car on the absolute limit in qualifying, then you can only go slower rather than faster, in the race. Especially before the first pitstops; when everyone is on the (roughly) same level of fuel and tyre wear. Does anyone have stats of who is most/least overtaken or most/least overtakes in the series of laps running up to the very first (planned) pitstop of the race?

In theory... and with a running start or assuming everyone starts perfectly. Good news for us that driver f**k up in qualifying and in the race! It should be clear evidence that the cars are too easy to drive if you need to introduce DRS, KERS and "extreme" tyres.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Just reading through, and Yalla F1 stats highlight 2 drivers for me with overtaking.

Kobayashi and Di Resta.

But certainly of the top drivers Hamilton appears to have a somthing extra with overtaking. Other than the usual brake options and setup, I would say he is actually more fearless in these area than the people he races against(webber, Vettel, Alonso, button and massa).

However it is a double edged sword, and I think we see what happens being either bordering on genius(alot of them are) and others(less of the time) he appears very foolish and haphazard.

All part of the game.

[PlatinumZealot]

It would be almost as boring as Vettel's. This is exactly what I'm trying to say, when you qualify where the car should be, you don't have many opportunities to do any takeovers.

Absolutely fascinating point you bring up there; and very true. If you're putting your car on the absolute limit in qualifying, then you can only go slower rather than faster, in the race. Especially before the first pitstops; when everyone is on the (roughly) same level of fuel and tyre wear. Does anyone have stats of who is most/least overtaken or most/least overtakes in the series of laps running up to the very first (planned) pitstop of the race?

But that argument is null and void considering the stats that Hamilton has both high qualifying position, and the highest overtakes for the win per overtake.

How do you explain those two?

[raymondu999]

He should be bagging pole at every race then

[Donuts]

He should be bagging pole at every race then

Then this thread would be absolete, since he would'nt be doing any overtaking at all!

[PlatinumZealot]

That only happens when you have a dominant car and sucky teammates.

[raymondu999]

Let's face it; there's no way to truly separate how much is driver, and how much is car in today's world of Formula 1. While highly unlikely, the Red Bull or McLaren could be only narrowly faster than the Hispania; and Lewis and Sebastian are just such excellent drivers that they can bring it to poles etc. On the flip side, maybe the McLaren or Red Bull are 5 seconds faster than the Ferrari; and Lewis and Sebastian are driving much slower. A lot of you will bring up Feranndo vs Lewis in 2007 to prove this isn't the case, but I'm not saying it is. I'm just driving the point that it's not possible to really single out car vs driver.

If a car is fast enough to win on merit; without strategy/on-track mistakes from others, or reliability issues, gifting him the win; then that driver+car combination will be one of, if not THE, fastest on that race day, and probably that weekend. Which means, by extension, fast enough for pole position. The races where Lewis won on merit (i.e. not because of gaffes by other teams, such as in Turkey 2010), Lewis+McLaren should be one of, if not THE fastest car-driver packages. So why wasn't he on pole for more of them? That's what I'm saying.

If he was fast enough to get the win, why wasn't he fast enough for pole?

[flynfrog]

as true sportsman lewis like to qualify towards the back so he can reward his fans (the most pure in racing)with exquisite overtakes.

[bhall]

Much like Michael Schumacher, who's completed more overtakes this season than any other driver. And we all know what a quality sportsman he is.