The Official 2015 Chinese Grand Prix Thread **Spoilers**
Discussion
IainT said:
Live performance takes some learning - getting over yourself isn't natural for all. Some people just do it naturally, some of us have worked at it (and I'm just talking pub gigs, not international events with a global audience) and it's a skill to be developed and honed.
I would have thought that he would have had a fair amount of coaching already and he's been in front of a camera, being interviewed live, for quite a few years already. HTP99 said:
I would have thought that he would have had a fair amount of coaching already and he's been in front of a camera, being interviewed live, for quite a few years already.
Big big difference between being coached to reposed to media questions and presenting live for a sustained period.I've had the former, the latter is terrifying.
IainT said:
Dr Z said:
the pace that Hamilton showed at lap 31 and 32 cannot be taken to be representative of the ‘true’ pace of Merc.
While I agree that it's not representative of the pace he could have completed the race at those two laps show just how much they had over Ferrari when they needed it.I don't doubt that Hamilton could have raised his overall pace by 0.5s per lap for the whole race. That's not to say the cars behind him couldn't have gone faster but they didn't, at any point, demonstrate such a clear advantage. Rosberg was utterly unable to get close to Hamilton pre stop and attempt an undercut.
In any case, I think this idea of 'true' pace is a bit of a myth, as your true pace is what you could do at any given point in time taking in to account all the prevailing conditions including strategy/anticipating SC as pointed out by Scuffers.
Dr Z said:
Agreed, but I think that was the point, one cannot take one car's pace and then proclaim that, indeed is the true pace of Mercedes as a whole, when clearly Rosberg is unable to match that--and he hasn't been far off Hamilton at all
this is where you're going wrong.over a race, Nico has never been able to match Lewis's pace (assuming Lewis does not have a problem).
Over one lap last year, Nico was doing better on Poles, BUT at the expense of race pace.
last race I believe was a fluke, Lewis could and should have gone faster on his final run.
the fact his time was set when the cct was still evolving, and would normally be considered his banker lap, not the outright on-the-limit lap.
Gary C said:
Have you seen the daily mail crap about the sexism group Opinion complaining about lewis spraying one of the girls on the podium. What a load of b
ks.
Yep, typical Daily Mail making a headline story out of nothing and a typical feminist group getting all hot under the collar over nothing and making themselves look like idiots. ks.Dr Z said:
In any case, I think this idea of 'true' pace is a bit of a myth, as your true pace is what you could do at any given point in time taking in to account all the prevailing conditions including strategy/anticipating SC as pointed out by Scuffers.
Absolutely. You could maybe have an ultimate pace - i.e. what you generally get in Qualifying but that's not representative of what pace can be run with fuel on for lots of laps.Well, it's been a few years since I posted on PH but I'm pleased to see the same level of in depth, serious discussion at varying levels of intellect continues as before 
. Just for the record, I'm firmly in the "still enjoying F1" camp. Last weekends race was fascinating on many levels. As you were.
. Just for the record, I'm firmly in the "still enjoying F1" camp. Last weekends race was fascinating on many levels. As you were.Scuffers said:
define turning it down?
Their issues last year were never related to how hard they pushed the IC engine, it was all about how aggressively they used ERS (ie, rear braking) causing the electronics to overheat and fail.
One assumes they are re-designed this part for this year.....
not 100% ...& hence why i used the term PU, rather than just ICE Their issues last year were never related to how hard they pushed the IC engine, it was all about how aggressively they used ERS (ie, rear braking) causing the electronics to overheat and fail.
One assumes they are re-designed this part for this year.....
i'd hazard a guess they've changed a fair bit ...seeing as they spent 25 of their 32 tokens already
& did they suffer anywhere else apart from Canada with the MGU-K?
angrymoby said:
not 100% ...& hence why i used the term PU, rather than just ICE
i'd hazard a guess they've changed a fair bit ...seeing as they spent 25 of their 32 tokens already
& did they suffer anywhere else apart from Canada with the MGU-K?
it wasn't the MGU-K that failed, it was the electronics that took power from it and re-charged the battery that failed (ERS).i'd hazard a guess they've changed a fair bit ...seeing as they spent 25 of their 32 tokens already
& did they suffer anywhere else apart from Canada with the MGU-K?
and yes, Nico's failed in the last race, they also had it fail in testing.
last year this limited how aggressive they could be with system settings.
Scuffers said:
Dr Z said:
Agreed, but I think that was the point, one cannot take one car's pace and then proclaim that, indeed is the true pace of Mercedes as a whole, when clearly Rosberg is unable to match that--and he hasn't been far off Hamilton at all
this is where you're going wrong.over a race, Nico has never been able to match Lewis's pace (assuming Lewis does not have a problem).
Over one lap last year, Nico was doing better on Poles, BUT at the expense of race pace.
last race I believe was a fluke, Lewis could and should have gone faster on his final run.
the fact his time was set when the cct was still evolving, and would normally be considered his banker lap, not the outright on-the-limit lap.
Most of the gap between Hamilton and Rosberg in this GP was built up in the in- and out-laps. In the second stint, Rosberg was actually catching Hamilton as the Ferraris caught him. Then, we see those fast laps from Hamilton again, but not from Rosberg. This simply suggests that Hamilton was able to conserve the tyres better whilst allowing Rosberg to catch him, so he has the tyres to fend off an attack or when needed for the in-lap.
I’m saying it was simply down to the tyres/clean air running that Hamilton had that extra pace. I can’t see Hamilton maintaining 1 sec faster lap time throughout the race, whilst maintaining similar stint lengths, even not anticipating a random SC.
As for the Qualifying, he should have, but didn't. I could just as well assert, Rosberg should have gone quicker in the banker lap, but he didn't. It means he couldn't. Simple. If we're talking hypotheticals, anybody could assert anything.
Dr Z said:
No, you misunderstand. All I’m saying is that for the fast laps Hamilton was able to put in at the end of the stints, if that is representative of what the W06 could do at that time at the track, then Rosberg should have a similar jump in performance for his in-laps particularly as he was shading Hamilton or faster than him for most of the duration of those stints. Hamilton could only maintain a small 1.5 sec gap during the first stint to Rosberg.
Most of the gap between Hamilton and Rosberg in this GP was built up in the in- and out-laps. In the second stint, Rosberg was actually catching Hamilton as the Ferraris caught him. Then, we see those fast laps from Hamilton again, but not from Rosberg. This simply suggests that Hamilton was able to conserve the tyres better whilst allowing Rosberg to catch him, so he has the tyres to fend off an attack or when needed for the in-lap.
I’m saying it was simply down to the tyres/clean air running that Hamilton had that extra pace. I can’t see Hamilton maintaining 1 sec faster lap time throughout the race, whilst maintaining similar stint lengths, even not anticipating a random SC.
As for the Qualifying, he should have, but didn't. I could just as well assert, Rosberg should have gone quicker in the banker lap, but he didn't. It means he couldn't. Simple. If we're talking hypotheticals, anybody could assert anything.
think we are going to have to disagree on this!Most of the gap between Hamilton and Rosberg in this GP was built up in the in- and out-laps. In the second stint, Rosberg was actually catching Hamilton as the Ferraris caught him. Then, we see those fast laps from Hamilton again, but not from Rosberg. This simply suggests that Hamilton was able to conserve the tyres better whilst allowing Rosberg to catch him, so he has the tyres to fend off an attack or when needed for the in-lap.
I’m saying it was simply down to the tyres/clean air running that Hamilton had that extra pace. I can’t see Hamilton maintaining 1 sec faster lap time throughout the race, whilst maintaining similar stint lengths, even not anticipating a random SC.
As for the Qualifying, he should have, but didn't. I could just as well assert, Rosberg should have gone quicker in the banker lap, but he didn't. It means he couldn't. Simple. If we're talking hypotheticals, anybody could assert anything.
Lewis could have pulled away from Nico, but at what cost?, all he needed to do was keep him over 1 sec behind, in the first stint, they were not sure just how fast the Ferrari was or what it's tyre life would be, to run off and possible screw your tyres would have been fool hardy.
Realistically, Nico could have attacked at any time, the simple fact he did not suggests he knew he did not have the time in hand to manage the job, yet he could go faster, but so could Lewis.
in this situation, his best chance was the overlap at pit-stops, but he failed to make up the pace to manage this, whereas Lewis demonstrates how to do the job by blistering in and out laps.
Not wishing to be too controversial, but I do think that Nico has been most compromised from the radio ban (reduced chatter). There were many occasions last year when he was being spoon-fed details of what Lewis was up to.
I guess that Lewis has also spent the winter brooding over how he can mask his data from Nico. An example being the way he backed of in sector 3 in FP3 on Saturday.
Dare I say that I think that Lewis has raw instinctive driving skills and Nico is more analytical (The Professor)
I guess that Lewis has also spent the winter brooding over how he can mask his data from Nico. An example being the way he backed of in sector 3 in FP3 on Saturday.
Dare I say that I think that Lewis has raw instinctive driving skills and Nico is more analytical (The Professor)
rdjohn said:
Dare I say that I think that Lewis has raw instinctive driving skills and Nico is more analytical (The Professor)
I see zero evidence that Nico is any more analytical/intelligent than Lewis (or any other driver out there).the fact he needed spoon feeding during the race kind of makes the point.
If you go back a few years, I remember Schumacher mid-race discussing how they could/should change strategy with Brawn, as well as driving the wheels of the car, that was what I call multi-tasking and a clear demonstration of being analytical.
Scuffers said:
rdjohn said:
Dare I say that I think that Lewis has raw instinctive driving skills and Nico is more analytical (The Professor)
I see zero evidence that Nico is any more analytical/intelligent than Lewis (or any other driver out there).the fact he needed spoon feeding during the race kind of makes the point.
If you go back a few years, I remember Schumacher mid-race discussing how they could/should change strategy with Brawn, as well as driving the wheels of the car, that was what I call multi-tasking and a clear demonstration of being analytical.
Hamilton has out thought rosberg. Race last year Suzuka, hamilton stayed in the wet part of the track and preserved his intermediate tyres so well he could drive around rosberg at First Curve, rosberg was often 2-3 feet different in line and running on dryer sections. Ok not the best example but one of the most obvious.
Scuffers said:
I see zero evidence that Nico is any more analytical/intelligent than Lewis (or any other driver out there).
Indeed. Button and Vettel are wanting to know who is where on the track and what they are up to. These chaps I think are the best thinkers out there. Alonso also not too bad.Lewis however I think just has sheer instinct and driving ability. He goes fast enough when needed and can pull out stonking laps when needed. Nico however seems to be lacking in this area and frankly at the moment in the "racing" aspect of the racing driver. He keeps acting like as soon as someone is near him or past him, that is it, they have beaten him, there is no question of him attacking and getting an overtake done.
Can you imagine Lewis sitting behind Nico in China? Or would Lewis have been right up the gearbox in the dirty air looking for a way past to take the lead instead of whining that the Ferraris were catching up..
Jasandjules said:
Scuffers said:
I see zero evidence that Nico is any more analytical/intelligent than Lewis (or any other driver out there).
Indeed. Button and Vettel are wanting to know who is where on the track and what they are up to. These chaps I think are the best thinkers out there. Alonso also not too bad.Lewis however I think just has sheer instinct and driving ability. He goes fast enough when needed and can pull out stonking laps when needed. Nico however seems to be lacking in this area and frankly at the moment in the "racing" aspect of the racing driver. He keeps acting like as soon as someone is near him or past him, that is it, they have beaten him, there is no question of him attacking and getting an overtake done.
Can you imagine Lewis sitting behind Nico in China? Or would Lewis have been right up the gearbox in the dirty air looking for a way past to take the lead instead of whining that the Ferraris were catching up..
Whichever way you cut it, at the moment LH has the beating of NR, and some of that just has to be calculation.
hora said:
I don't doubt Nico IS intelligent- numerous languages, interest in the engineering side/discussing with his engineers etc however theres being intelligent and doing all that whilst having to drive very fast. I think he needs assist when the two come together.
do you think the other drivers don't talk to their engineers?I am sure he's not stupid, but I don't think he has shown any greater understanding of the subject than anybody else.
seems to be his engineering skills have just been bigged up by Sky (Ted).
.Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff