Hamilton has scored more points / finish than Rosberg. That's the telling statistic.Shrieker wrote:Basically, what keeps Ros afloat is all those second place finishes. If Hamilton does not suffer any more mechanicals, my money is on him.
Hamilton has scored more points / finish than Rosberg. That's the telling statistic.Shrieker wrote:Basically, what keeps Ros afloat is all those second place finishes. If Hamilton does not suffer any more mechanicals, my money is on him.
What does it even mean in both cases?Just_a_fan wrote:Hamilton has scored more points / finish than Rosberg. That's the telling statistic.Shrieker wrote:Basically, what keeps Ros afloat is all those second place finishes. If Hamilton does not suffer any more mechanicals, my money is on him.
Oh look, you're bashing Hamilton again.iotar__ wrote:What does it even mean in both cases?Just_a_fan wrote:Hamilton has scored more points / finish than Rosberg. That's the telling statistic.Shrieker wrote:Basically, what keeps Ros afloat is all those second place finishes. If Hamilton does not suffer any more mechanicals, my money is on him.
1.What second places "keeping afloat". I thought it was being in front of your main rival and faster in qualifying. Scoring points matter? Yes it does. Why should Rosberg be ashamed of this second place in Canada for example with a broken car he was able to manage unlike Hamilton? Or Bahrain where he was faster in qualifying and the race, or in Barcelona where he was faster in the race and strategy separated them and Hamilton used engine boost. Why should he be ashamed of second place in China where his telemetry didn't work and his race ended before the start?
You know what "keeps Hamilton afloat" after blunders in Austria, Canada, GB? Ultra dominant car. In Germany it was stewards closing their eyes on breaking the rules. Hamilton has only himself to blame to not achieve second place there that apparently "keeps Rosberg afloat".
2. What's telling about it? Some cryptic you know what I mean. No I don't know what you mean. Clarify. These are not really that complicated cases, every race has a pretty clear story, no need for "telling" statistics that prove that your favourite driver is the bestest.
Edit: to cover one more, why Rosberg should be ashamed of second place in Spa where but for three circumstances (forced to give position to Button, too early stop (questionable) and tyre dangling) he could have won the race? Remember why accident happened? Because he was faster than Hamilton, closed and tried to overtake.
Lesson #1 in trolling, always disregard interesting information when it goes against your argument but put emphasis on it when the argument goes with you.iotar__ wrote:Or Bahrain where he was faster in qualifying and the race, or in Barcelona where he was faster in the race and strategy separated them and Hamilton used engine boost.
Making the picture more broader, Lewis had a good cushion of 10 seconds after the last stop. He was on medium and Nico was on faster Soft rubber. Safety car got deployed and an easy looking strategy for Lewis, ended up in eroding his lead making them fight. Nico was faster only because of different compounds. Had there been no Safety Car, there would not have been any fight at all. Lewis was just plain unlucky to get into that position, but in racing all these are possibilitiesiotar__ wrote: Bahrain where he was faster in qualifying and the race, or in Barcelona where he was faster in the race and strategy separated them and Hamilton used engine boost. Why should he be ashamed of second place in China where his telemetry didn't work and his race ended before the start?
Code: Select all
6 N. ROSBERG 44 L. HAMILTON
1 18:05:59 1 18:05:58
2 1:40.938 2 1:40.928
3 1:40.566 3 1:40.627
4 1:40.872 4 1:40.544
5 1:40.978 5 1:40.780
6 1:40.985 6 1:41.025
7 1:40.888 7 1:40.839
8 1:40.823 8 1:40.945
9 1:40.989 9 1:40.842
10 1:40.994 10 1:41.182
11 1:41.306 11 1:41.174
12 1:41.336 12 1:41.377
13 1:41.398 13 1:41.421
14 1:41.851 14 1:41.751
15 1:41.671 15 1:42.002
16 1:41.494 16 1:41.775
17 1:41.455 17 1:41.802
18 1:42.587 18 1:42.621
19 1:43.965 19 P 1:46.545
20 1:41.442 20 1:59.311
21 P 1:44.439 21 1:39.765
22 2:01.019 22 1:39.666
23 1:39.886 23 1:40.357
24 1:40.178 24 1:39.743
25 1:40.227 25 1:39.809
26 1:40.367 26 1:40.042
27 1:40.285 27 1:40.045
28 1:40.325 28 1:40.098
29 1:40.443 29 1:40.250
30 1:40.262 30 1:40.141
31 1:40.412 31 1:40.176
32 1:40.487 32 1:39.793
33 1:40.170 33 1:40.250
34 1:40.367 34 1:39.930
35 1:40.288 35 1:39.915
36 1:40.536 36 1:40.267
37 1:40.356 37 1:40.185
38 1:40.446 38 1:40.341
39 1:40.120 39 1:40.120
40 1:40.535 40 1:40.796
41 P 1:47.842 41 P 1:43.783
42 2:32.295 42 2:44.955
43 2:26.050 43 2:25.687
44 2:33.717 44 2:33.582
45 2:21.868 45 2:22.046
46 2:21.446 46 2:22.278
47 1:38.104 47 1:38.037
48 1:37.808 48 1:37.306
49 1:37.020 49 1:37.108
50 1:37.374 50 1:37.656
51 1:37.808 51 1:37.855
52 1:39.494 52 1:39.481
53 1:39.526 53 1:39.277
54 1:38.125 54 1:37.941
55 1:37.898 55 1:37.923
56 1:37.822 56 1:37.794
57 1:38.458 57 1:38.387
Ultra dominant car - Hmmm... So how was that Nico couldn't overtake JEV in Hungary, whereas Lewis did?iotar__ wrote: You know what "keeps Hamilton afloat" after blunders in Austria, Canada, GB? Ultra dominant car. In Germany it was stewards closing their eyes on breaking the rules. Hamilton has only himself to blame to not achieve second place there that apparently "keeps Rosberg afloat".
Nico was easily as fast as Lewis in Bahrain, probably a few tenths faster overall.prince wrote:Making the picture more broader, Lewis had a good cushion of 10 seconds after the last stop. He was on medium and Nico was on faster Soft rubber. Safety car got deployed and an easy looking strategy for Lewis, ended up in eroding his lead making them fight. Nico was faster only because of different compounds. Had there been no Safety Car, there would not have been any fight at all.iotar__ wrote: Bahrain where he was faster in qualifying and the race, or in Barcelona where he was faster in the race and strategy separated them and Hamilton used engine boost. Why should he be ashamed of second place in China where his telemetry didn't work and his race ended before the start?
They were on different tyres.Look at the lap chart and tell us, how Nico was faster.
I agree with most of your points - but I'm not certain there's only a singular conclusion to derrive from them. You state in point 7 that in the middle stint, Rosberg only lost an average of .20 seconds/lap while on the prime tyres, which are typically significantly slower. I'm not sure I agree with that. There's no doubt that Hamilton did receive the 'optimum strategy' call by going OOP (opposed to Nico going OPO) to the best of Mercedes's knowlege at the time, but there's no conclusive evidence that the prime tyre wasn't the stronger tyre to be on in the 2nd stint. This wasn't the first race by the way, where the prime tyre held up quite well, relative to the option. They were on drifferent stints, yes, but lets not forget that Hamilton while on that 2nd stint, wasn't attempting to get the most out of his tyres - he was driving with foresight - extending the durability of his tyres and the stint, to find the sweet spot in not having to come in too early for his last stint, but also extend his gap to Nico to avoid being vulnerable. The 10 second gap was probably sufficient for the win and his strategy, if there hadn't been a safety car. It was quite similar to the race in Barcelona, where the car running on the OPO strategy seemed to be quicker than the one doing OOP.Kingshark wrote:Nico was easily as fast as Lewis in Bahrain, probably a few tenths faster overall.
Let's look at the facts;
4. Lewis had to push his tyres harder to maintain the same pace as Nico. This would imply that Lewis had less pace overall.
6. The gap increased from 6.0 to 10.0 seconds in the next 20 laps (from lap 21 to lap 40).
7. This means that Rosberg was only losing an average of 0.20 seconds/lap on the prime tyres, which are typically significantly slower.
Although there is emphasis that the 8th gear in particular was way too long:SectorOne wrote:I can´t really understand the article much(google translate for german and italian is not particularly good) but is it saying only 8th will get shorter or all of them?
(Basicilly telling that not counting for Monza, the 8th gear was too long. Monza was the only appropiate place to have such a long 8th gear.)Bis Monza ist Mercedes mit einem viel zu langen achten Gang gefahren.
#aerogollumturbof1 wrote: YOU SHALL NOT......STALLLLL!!!
I don't believe, or atleast not that it'll work. Mercedes would never deploy an unexperienced driver. Nico and Lewis know that.NTS wrote:Could it be that they put him there just to put some strength in any "if you don't listen to our orders you will be out of the car for one race" type threats? Because without a reserve driver they really couldn't do such a thing.