Lewis Hamilton

Lewis Hamilton

Author
Discussion

kiseca

7,603 posts

165 months

Wednesday 2nd October
quotequote all
Durzel said:
HustleRussell said:
Durzel said:
People suggesting that the Merc isn't the best car and that somehow Ferrari have always had the advantage are trying to concoct some kind of fantasy
Nobody has said that.
Not explicitly though, but there has been strong suggestions in various threads that the Ferrari has been the better car most of the time when that plainly is not true. I can only surmise that the justification for alluding to that is because it’s uncomfortable to imagine Hamilton is winning because of the car (which also isn’t strictly true, but is a major factor)
I haven't seen that. I've seen suggestions that Ferrari had a faster car for some of 2017 and much of 2018, most of that being reflective of the opinions of the sport's commentators and frankly a lot of F1 personnel.

I haven't seen anyone on here suggest that any car on the grid was as good as, never mind better than, the Merc, at any point 2014 to 2016

Also, these arguments always seem to polarise themselves into the black and white options that it's either all the car, or it's all the driver. It's really obvious that neither of those two extremes are true, nor have they ever been. If someone seems to be suggesting that Hamilton would be winning championships in any old car, I think it's safe to assume that I've misunderstood their point. When they seem to say it's all the car and any driver could win in it, then the assumption is less safe but the situation also unlikely.

Sure, a reliable car with a performance advantage makes the driver's job easier, but he still needs to beat his team mate, and, esp. after year one, he has to keep his claim to what would be the most sought after seat on the grid. If you own the best car you don't then habitually risk its potential success on any old driver.

It's a team sport. The car is part of the puzzle, and so is the driver, the pit crew, the designers, the strategy planners.... and yet these unanswerable arguments perpetually go around and around about how much of that equation was owed to the driver, or the car, and how much a different driver may have changed the result. I'm guilty of that myself. I truly believe Prost would still have won the 1986 championship had he been in one of the Williams and the driver he replaced - doesn't matter if it was Mansell or Piquet - took his McLaren seat. But I'll never know for sure, and neither will someone who disagrees with me. So why would the argument persist?


Edited by kiseca on Wednesday 2nd October 17:43


Edited by kiseca on Wednesday 2nd October 17:44

Bo_apex

997 posts

164 months

Wednesday 2nd October
quotequote all
paulguitar said:
Bo_apex said:
Rosberg and Hamilton shared an equal 59 front row starts each.

Mercedes was in a separate class.
As far as I can recall Rosberg was retired in 2017?
Correct.

And Mercedes today remains the best package over race distance.

rdjohn

3,716 posts

141 months

Thursday 3rd October
quotequote all
Bo_apex said:
Correct.

And Mercedes today remains the best package over race distance.
I don’t believe that has been the case since the summer break.

When times are difficult, Lewis is one of very few drivers who can extract close to 100% of the car’s potential lap after lap. I think that is what destroys Valteri’s confidence as the season progresses.

paulguitar

3,505 posts

59 months

Thursday 3rd October
quotequote all
Bo_apex said:
And Mercedes today remains the best package over race distance.
Even if that were true, it is moot when the Ferrari currently has a significant qualifying advantage and is quantifiably faster on the straights. I suspect if Hamilton were given a choice of car at the moment he would pick a red one.

Also if Hamilton were a Ferrari driver, you’d be claiming that the Ferrari is the car which is the ‘better package over a race distance’. It’s clear you have a particular drum you always beat.


Edited by paulguitar on Thursday 3rd October 09:40

Durzel

7,834 posts

114 months

Thursday 3rd October
quotequote all
kiseca said:
Durzel said:
HustleRussell said:
Durzel said:
People suggesting that the Merc isn't the best car and that somehow Ferrari have always had the advantage are trying to concoct some kind of fantasy
Nobody has said that.
Not explicitly though, but there has been strong suggestions in various threads that the Ferrari has been the better car most of the time when that plainly is not true. I can only surmise that the justification for alluding to that is because it’s uncomfortable to imagine Hamilton is winning because of the car (which also isn’t strictly true, but is a major factor)
I haven't seen that. I've seen suggestions that Ferrari had a faster car for some of 2017 and much of 2018, most of that being reflective of the opinions of the sport's commentators and frankly a lot of F1 personnel.

I haven't seen anyone on here suggest that any car on the grid was as good as, never mind better than, the Merc, at any point 2014 to 2016

Also, these arguments always seem to polarise themselves into the black and white options that it's either all the car, or it's all the driver. It's really obvious that neither of those two extremes are true, nor have they ever been. If someone seems to be suggesting that Hamilton would be winning championships in any old car, I think it's safe to assume that I've misunderstood their point. When they seem to say it's all the car and any driver could win in it, then the assumption is less safe but the situation also unlikely.

Sure, a reliable car with a performance advantage makes the driver's job easier, but he still needs to beat his team mate, and, esp. after year one, he has to keep his claim to what would be the most sought after seat on the grid. If you own the best car you don't then habitually risk its potential success on any old driver.

It's a team sport. The car is part of the puzzle, and so is the driver, the pit crew, the designers, the strategy planners.... and yet these unanswerable arguments perpetually go around and around about how much of that equation was owed to the driver, or the car, and how much a different driver may have changed the result. I'm guilty of that myself. I truly believe Prost would still have won the 1986 championship had he been in one of the Williams and the driver he replaced - doesn't matter if it was Mansell or Piquet - took his McLaren seat. But I'll never know for sure, and neither will someone who disagrees with me. So why would the argument persist?


Edited by kiseca on Wednesday 2nd October 17:43


Edited by kiseca on Wednesday 2nd October 17:44
Good points well made.

I guess there is an element of frustration, from my perspective at least, that the cars are a factor simply because it dilutes the objective analysis of drivers. We'll never really know what the likes of Vettel or Ricciardo, or even LeClerc would do in the Mercedes. Based on recent form LeClerc would've been in with a good shout of bossing Hamilton around if they were in the same car. It seems Vettel wouldn't have coped with the pressure. Likewise Ricciardo - would he be on the podium as often as Bottas? etc etc.

Because the cars are different people like myself end up looking to compare drivers based on hypotheticals, which is never really satisfying and as forums like this prove ends up being quite antagonistic, with people arguing with eachother based on unproveable opinions.

I would very much like F1 to be all about the drivers and the teams, the strategy, etc. I suppose at least with football, for example, the differences between the teams are in player skill and manager tactics. Southampton could beat Man City, whereas Haas have zero chance of beating Mercedes short of a freak event like mechanical failure. The Haas drivers line up every race weekend knowing that they have no hope of winning.

¯\_( -_-)_/¯

paulguitar

3,505 posts

59 months

Thursday 3rd October
quotequote all
Durzel said:
Good points well made.

I guess there is an element of frustration, from my perspective at least, that the cars are a factor simply because it dilutes the objective analysis of drivers. We'll never really know what the likes of Vettel or Ricciardo, or even LeClerc would do in the Mercedes. Based on recent form LeClerc would've been in with a good shout of bossing Hamilton around if they were in the same car. It seems Vettel wouldn't have coped with the pressure. Likewise Ricciardo - would he be on the podium as often as Bottas? etc etc.

Because the cars are different people like myself end up looking to compare drivers based on hypotheticals, which is never really satisfying and as forums like this prove ends up being quite antagonistic, with people arguing with eachother based on unproveable opinions.

I would very much like F1 to be all about the drivers and the teams, the strategy, etc. I suppose at least with football, for example, the differences between the teams are in player skill and manager tactics. Southampton could beat Man City, whereas Haas have zero chance of beating Mercedes short of a freak event like mechanical failure. The Haas drivers line up every race weekend knowing that they have no hope of winning.

¯\_( -_-)_/¯
Indeed, racing can be very frustrating as the car is such a big factor.

I don’t think there is any reason to suggest Charles would be ‘bossing Lewis around’ were he driving a Mercedes. What we have seen post summer break is exactly what you are alluding to, IE a car swaying things in one direction. What’s clear is LeClerc is very much the real deal and hard to cope with for Seb. I’m sure if he were Lewis’s team mate it would be entertaining for us but at present I think Hamilton is still very much the star of F1.

BTW it’s illuminating to go back and have a look at the pre-F1 careers of the drivers of you are curious to see how they did in equal cars.

vdn

6,782 posts

149 months

Thursday 3rd October
quotequote all
paulguitar said:
Durzel said:
Good points well made.

I guess there is an element of frustration, from my perspective at least, that the cars are a factor simply because it dilutes the objective analysis of drivers. We'll never really know what the likes of Vettel or Ricciardo, or even LeClerc would do in the Mercedes. Based on recent form LeClerc would've been in with a good shout of bossing Hamilton around if they were in the same car. It seems Vettel wouldn't have coped with the pressure. Likewise Ricciardo - would he be on the podium as often as Bottas? etc etc.

Because the cars are different people like myself end up looking to compare drivers based on hypotheticals, which is never really satisfying and as forums like this prove ends up being quite antagonistic, with people arguing with eachother based on unproveable opinions.

I would very much like F1 to be all about the drivers and the teams, the strategy, etc. I suppose at least with football, for example, the differences between the teams are in player skill and manager tactics. Southampton could beat Man City, whereas Haas have zero chance of beating Mercedes short of a freak event like mechanical failure. The Haas drivers line up every race weekend knowing that they have no hope of winning.

¯\_( -_-)_/¯
Indeed, racing can be very frustrating as the car is such a big factor.

I don’t think there is any reason to suggest Charles would be ‘bossing Lewis around’ were he driving a Mercedes. What we have seen post summer break is exactly what you are alluding to, IE a car swaying things in one direction. What’s clear is LeClerc is very much the real deal and hard to cope with for Seb. I’m sure if he were Lewis’s team mate it would be entertaining for us but at present I think Hamilton is still very much the star of F1.

BTW it’s illuminating to go back and have a look at the pre-F1 careers of the drivers of you are curious to see how they did in equal cars.
Exactly!

I sound like a broken record; but in lower formulae; the cars are nigh on the same and there are times where you can compare - Vettel and Hamilton is just one example of there being great footage of them duelling in lower formulae; equal cars.

HighwayStar

2,560 posts

90 months

Thursday 3rd October
quotequote all
vdn said:
paulguitar said:
Durzel said:
Good points well made.

I guess there is an element of frustration, from my perspective at least, that the cars are a factor simply because it dilutes the objective analysis of drivers. We'll never really know what the likes of Vettel or Ricciardo, or even LeClerc would do in the Mercedes. Based on recent form LeClerc would've been in with a good shout of bossing Hamilton around if they were in the same car. It seems Vettel wouldn't have coped with the pressure. Likewise Ricciardo - would he be on the podium as often as Bottas? etc etc.

Because the cars are different people like myself end up looking to compare drivers based on hypotheticals, which is never really satisfying and as forums like this prove ends up being quite antagonistic, with people arguing with eachother based on unproveable opinions.

I would very much like F1 to be all about the drivers and the teams, the strategy, etc. I suppose at least with football, for example, the differences between the teams are in player skill and manager tactics. Southampton could beat Man City, whereas Haas have zero chance of beating Mercedes short of a freak event like mechanical failure. The Haas drivers line up every race weekend knowing that they have no hope of winning.

¯\_( -_-)_/¯
Indeed, racing can be very frustrating as the car is such a big factor.

I don’t think there is any reason to suggest Charles would be ‘bossing Lewis around’ were he driving a Mercedes. What we have seen post summer break is exactly what you are alluding to, IE a car swaying things in one direction. What’s clear is LeClerc is very much the real deal and hard to cope with for Seb. I’m sure if he were Lewis’s team mate it would be entertaining for us but at present I think Hamilton is still very much the star of F1.

BTW it’s illuminating to go back and have a look at the pre-F1 careers of the drivers of you are curious to see how they did in equal cars.
Exactly!

I sound like a broken record; but in lower formulae; the cars are nigh on the same and there are times where you can compare - Vettel and Hamilton is just one example of there being great footage of them duelling in lower formulae; equal cars.
Alas cars that are nigh on the same isn't F1. Who best interprets the rule book, the strategy, the development race, changing and adapting tactics during race conditions. Its what I like... There are others series I could watch if I want to see drivers in similar cars.

kambites

57,442 posts

167 months

Thursday 3rd October
quotequote all
HighwayStar said:
Alas cars that are nigh on the same isn't F1. Who best interprets the rule book, the strategy, the development race, changing and adapting tactics during race conditions. Its what I like... There are others series I could watch if I want to see drivers in similar cars.
yes F1 has always been about the cars first and the drivers second. Change that and it would, IMO, no longer be F1.

HighwayStar

2,560 posts

90 months

Thursday 3rd October
quotequote all
kambites said:
HighwayStar said:
Alas cars that are nigh on the same isn't F1. Who best interprets the rule book, the strategy, the development race, changing and adapting tactics during race conditions. Its what I like... There are others series I could watch if I want to see drivers in similar cars.
yes F1 has always been about the cars first and the drivers second. Change that and it would, IMO, no longer be F1.
Exactly...

yonex

15,270 posts

114 months

Thursday 3rd October
quotequote all
HighwayStar said:
Exactly...
It used to be about racing. Sadly that died.

HighwayStar

2,560 posts

90 months

Thursday 3rd October
quotequote all
yonex said:
HighwayStar said:
Exactly...
It used to be about racing. Sadly that died.
F1 has changed throughout the years but in my opinion it’s still racing, the drivers have always managed the cars in some way to the finish.
Where was the racing when lots of cars didn’t make it to the end or whole laps down?

Gary C

5,278 posts

125 months

Friday 4th October
quotequote all
yonex said:
HighwayStar said:
Exactly...
It used to be about racing. Sadly that died.
When ?

Its been the way it is since at least the 70's

rdjohn

3,716 posts

141 months

Friday 4th October
quotequote all
kambites said:
yes F1 has always been about the cars first and the drivers second. Change that and it would, IMO, no longer be F1.
I think that you are going to be disappointed some time soon.

A key objective of Liberty is to dumb-down car design and put the driver in control. I guess that they would be happy to lose the 1% of fans that actually care about the technical design, in order to gain another 10% who currently would rather spend their time at a PC console playing, rather than watch the same 6 cars / drivers act out the script that has been pre-determined on simulators and finessed during FP sessions.

At the moment the media is building up a massive feud between Seb and Charles. It makes for good reading and Social Media speculation.

The fact that Ferrari have made a genuine leap in technology since the summer break, is the really hot news. We can see the result, but no one has an idea what they have done, because it is a secret. As we are not likely to find out in the future, it is hard to understand why someone might think the technological race is all-important.

HorneyMX5

4,543 posts

96 months

Friday 4th October
quotequote all
Dumbing down car design would see a lot of the teams walking I would have thought. F1 has always been about man and Machine, never exclusively one. There’s already a ton of series where the cars are the same. F1 is probably in its final decade or two anyway as FE is where are the money and brands are heading these days.

HighwayStar

2,560 posts

90 months

Friday 4th October
quotequote all
rdjohn said:
kambites said:
yes F1 has always been about the cars first and the drivers second. Change that and it would, IMO, no longer be F1.
I think that you are going to be disappointed some time soon.

A key objective of Liberty is to dumb-down car design and put the driver in control. I guess that they would be happy to lose the 1% of fans that actually care about the technical design, in order to gain another 10% who currently would rather spend their time at a PC console playing, rather than watch the same 6 cars / drivers act out the script that has been pre-determined on simulators and finessed during FP sessions.

At the moment the media is building up a massive feud between Seb and Charles. It makes for good reading and Social Media speculation.

The fact that Ferrari have made a genuine leap in technology since the summer break, is the really hot news. We can see the result, but no one has an idea what they have done, because it is a secret. As we are not likely to find out in the future, it is hard to understand why someone might think the technological race is all-important.
Toto believes Mercedes changing more of their focus on the 2020 car and Ferrari pressing on with updates part of the reason Merc have appeared to underperform post summer break...

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mercedes-2020-f...

rdjohn

3,716 posts

141 months

Friday 4th October
quotequote all
HighwayStar said:
Toto believes Mercedes changing more of their focus on the 2020 car and Ferrari pressing on with updates part of the reason Merc have appeared to underperform post summer break...

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mercedes-2020-f...
That does not explain the significant shift in straight line performance. Increased power of the P3 unit does not seem to show in the customer cars, but back-to-back with Mercedes it was obvious. Lewis could pull time back in corners, so it does not seem to be aero.

But this is my beef - we just do not know, because it is secret. And therefore useless as a reasonable sporting milestone.

If you look at another high-tech sport like Americas Cup, by the end of the series it is usually obvious why a team won. The best boat tends to get to be the challenger, but the best crew tends to win.

TheDeuce

3,135 posts

12 months

Friday 4th October
quotequote all
HighwayStar said:
Toto believes Mercedes changing more of their focus on the 2020 car and Ferrari pressing on with updates part of the reason Merc have appeared to underperform post summer break...

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mercedes-2020-f...
What's interesting is that by always being second if not first... Mercedes have actually performed exactly as well as Ferrari since the summer break. Bot teams have taken 133 points.

Admittedly that says more about the cost of Seb screwing up quite often than anything else.

It does also show, however, how important it is that both Mercedes drivers keep their heads and run a good race effort, even if for them it's not a 'good' race. They nearly always take the most points they reasonably could be expected to.That means any team that is technically 'better' on some level needs a long and sustained string of victories to reel them in. Ferrari can't seem to sustain that sort of performance for long enough with a team or Vettel cock up resetting the balance.

HighwayStar

2,560 posts

90 months

Friday 4th October
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
HighwayStar said:
Toto believes Mercedes changing more of their focus on the 2020 car and Ferrari pressing on with updates part of the reason Merc have appeared to underperform post summer break...

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mercedes-2020-f...
What's interesting is that by always being second if not first... Mercedes have actually performed exactly as well as Ferrari since the summer break. Bot teams have taken 133 points.

Admittedly that says more about the cost of Seb screwing up quite often than anything else.

It does also show, however, how important it is that both Mercedes drivers keep their heads and run a good race effort, even if for them it's not a 'good' race. They nearly always take the most points they reasonably could be expected to.That means any team that is technically 'better' on some level needs a long and sustained string of victories to reel them in. Ferrari can't seem to sustain that sort of performance for long enough with a team or Vettel cock up resetting the balance.
If Merc can sustain their current level of performance whilst not bring much in the way of additional performance to the car for the remain races, it could be ominous for 2020. I imagine they are expecting Ferrari and RedBull to be much closer next season and want to be ready as early as possible.

TheDeuce

3,135 posts

12 months

Friday 4th October
quotequote all
HighwayStar said:
If Merc can sustain their current level of performance whilst not bring much in the way of additional performance to the car for the remain races, it could be ominous for 2020. I imagine they are expecting Ferrari and RedBull to be much closer next season and want to be ready as early as possible.
Yes - if they take both titles next season then their and Lewis's stint in F1 has been as great as possible pretty much, it's a valuable thing to secure! And I'm sure with this season nearly wrapped up, they won't want to lose any time towards securing their goals.

Then after next season, who the f knows what the field of play will look like? This is their big chance, prior to 2021 to become legendary. Hence, I think we'll see their biggest development push yet. They get one chance to round off their dominant streak beautifully, they will throw everything at it smile