Official 2022 Hungarian Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***

[Gad-Westy]

pablo said:

Or rather they thought Bottas would be quicker and give more of a st than he did, I thought he was a disgrace to be honest compared to Perez

TBH, I think Perez is quite overrated on PH. There seems to be an awful lot of love for him here but I'm not sure that the results back it up. If you take last season, if Perez had been as close to his teammate as Bottas was, RB would be constructor champions. Bottas' lack of defence at times was incredibly frustrating but he was still a more effective point scorer than Perez. There are many on here that seem to think Perez would be in with a shot of the title if RB let him but he is consistently out qualified and out raced by Max. He is having a good season in 2022 and currently sits third but as a ratio of point scoring vs his teammate, he is the furthest adrift of all of the top 6. I like Perez and I liked Bottas but they both seem to lack the last 1 or 2 percent that some of the other guys have.

[SturdyHSV]

NRS said:

SturdyHSV said:

jsf said:

HardtopManual said:

I’m sure someone on here will do the maths, but Leclerc has thrown away 30+ points with mistakes (Imola + Hungaroring) and Ferrari will have chucked away double that with DNFs and strategy errors. Leclerc really could still be in the lead of the WDC.

The weekend debrief on SkyF1 did a chart showing where Leclerc would be without the DNF's or screw ups, he was well in the lead. They have thrown it away.

Yep, and their graph didn't even need to change Max's points to reflect the fact he'd have scored far fewer points with LeClerc converting all the races he's been comfortably leading (at least 5 isn't it?)

If we’re adding all the DNF’s back then are we also doing the same to the 2 Max had? How would that impact the placement?

Would mean 2 additional second places (so 36 points) for Max, compared to what, about 5 wins for LeClerc, so an additional 125 points, and if Max was bumped to 2nd for all 5 of LeClerc's wins he'd have lost an additional ~35 points.

So for arguments sake, if all DNFs were taken out, I'd suggest Max would have roughly the same number of points (assuming he came 2nd whenever LeClerc didn't retire from 1st...) and LeClerc would have probably 125 more than he does now, putting him about 45 points in the lead?

We're well into the realms of utter theoretical guesswork here though!

[Gad-Westy]

SturdyHSV said:

NRS said:

SturdyHSV said:

jsf said:

HardtopManual said:

I’m sure someone on here will do the maths, but Leclerc has thrown away 30+ points with mistakes (Imola + Hungaroring) and Ferrari will have chucked away double that with DNFs and strategy errors. Leclerc really could still be in the lead of the WDC.

The weekend debrief on SkyF1 did a chart showing where Leclerc would be without the DNF's or screw ups, he was well in the lead. They have thrown it away.

Yep, and their graph didn't even need to change Max's points to reflect the fact he'd have scored far fewer points with LeClerc converting all the races he's been comfortably leading (at least 5 isn't it?)

If we’re adding all the DNF’s back then are we also doing the same to the 2 Max had? How would that impact the placement?

Would mean 2 additional second places (so 36 points) for Max, compared to what, about 5 wins for LeClerc, so an additional 125 points, and if Max was bumped to 2nd for all 5 of LeClerc's wins he'd have lost an additional ~35 points.

So for arguments sake, if all DNFs were taken out, I'd suggest Max would have roughly the same number of points (assuming he came 2nd whenever LeClerc didn't retire from 1st...) and LeClerc would have probably 125 more than he does now, putting him about 45 points in the lead?

We're well into the realms of utter theoretical guesswork here though!

125 points would suggest CL scored 0 in his cocked up races.

[PhilAsia]

So, here we are, going into the summer break...

[PhilAsia]

Piginapoke said:

pablo said:

Or rather they thought Bottas would be quicker and give more of a st than he did, I thought he was a disgrace to be honest compared to Perez

Well he gave it a good go in Hungary last year!

Really grasping at straws there PiaP

In the wet...

At the start...

1st corner...

Lando early brake...

Bottas lock up tap...

[snotrag]

He is brilliant as ever. I think Binotto might be the best!

[SturdyHSV]

Gad-Westy said:

SturdyHSV said:

NRS said:

SturdyHSV said:

jsf said:

HardtopManual said:

I’m sure someone on here will do the maths, but Leclerc has thrown away 30+ points with mistakes (Imola + Hungaroring) and Ferrari will have chucked away double that with DNFs and strategy errors. Leclerc really could still be in the lead of the WDC.

The weekend debrief on SkyF1 did a chart showing where Leclerc would be without the DNF's or screw ups, he was well in the lead. They have thrown it away.

Yep, and their graph didn't even need to change Max's points to reflect the fact he'd have scored far fewer points with LeClerc converting all the races he's been comfortably leading (at least 5 isn't it?)

If we’re adding all the DNF’s back then are we also doing the same to the 2 Max had? How would that impact the placement?

Would mean 2 additional second places (so 36 points) for Max, compared to what, about 5 wins for LeClerc, so an additional 125 points, and if Max was bumped to 2nd for all 5 of LeClerc's wins he'd have lost an additional ~35 points.

So for arguments sake, if all DNFs were taken out, I'd suggest Max would have roughly the same number of points (assuming he came 2nd whenever LeClerc didn't retire from 1st...) and LeClerc would have probably 125 more than he does now, putting him about 45 points in the lead?

We're well into the realms of utter theoretical guesswork here though!

125 points would suggest CL scored 0 in his cocked up races.

Ah yes of course, didn't give it much thought You must be an engineer by trade? Great pleasure in pointing out the mistake / problem with zero interest in offering a solution

So what has he had, 2 engine failures, 1 crash (so 75), then what was it, 4th place in Monaco because of strategy (13 point loss?), Hungary strategy lost a few places (another what, 8 points or so at least?) that's already close to 100 points, his mistake in Imola cost him a few places, Ferrari 'strategy' at Silverstone lost him some places, the power unit explosions put him at the back of the grid in Canada, and given how close Carlos was to winning you've got to assume Charles would have done as well or better there, more points lost, I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest without the failures and 'strategy' he'd probably have ~125 more points.

It's irrelevant anyway of course, just thought I'd try to add a bit more to the discussion.

[heebeegeetee]

SturdyHSV said:

Ah yes of course, didn't give it much thought You must be an engineer by trade? Great pleasure in pointing out the mistake / problem with zero interest in offering a solution

So what has he had, 2 engine failures, 1 crash (so 75), then what was it, 4th place in Monaco because of strategy (13 point loss?), Hungary strategy lost a few places (another what, 8 points or so at least?) that's already close to 100 points, his mistake in Imola cost him a few places, Ferrari 'strategy' at Silverstone lost him some places, the power unit explosions put him at the back of the grid in Canada, and given how close Carlos was to winning you've got to assume Charles would have done as well or better there, more points lost, I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest without the failures and 'strategy' he'd probably have ~125 more points.

It's irrelevant anyway of course, just thought I'd try to add a bit more to the discussion.

Silverstone began with Charles's spin in qually, otherwise he'd probably have been on pole and not troubled by Carlos and strategy.

Over the years Lewis and Mercedes have been criticised endlessly for "having it easy ". I thank Ferrari and both their drivers for showing us all how easy it is to get it wrong.

Mercedes and Lewis should never be criticised for not doing it like Ferrari. 🙂

[SturdyHSV]

heebeegeetee said:

Silverstone began with Charles's spin in qually, otherwise he'd probably have been on pole and not troubled by Carlos and strategy.

Over the years Lewis and Mercedes have been criticised endlessly for "having it easy ". I thank Ferrari and both their drivers for showing us all how easy it is to get it wrong.

Mercedes and Lewis should never be criticised for not doing it like Ferrari. ??

I'd forgotten about his quali spin, good point.

Agreed with Lewis and Merc, they didn't have it easy, they just made it look easy (except the one race a year they were contractually obliged to cock up ), which is very different.

They're demonstrating this year that even without the dominant car the team is still a top contender. Ferrari demonstrating that it doesn't matter how fast the car is if it's on fire and facing the wrong way.

[jsf]

SturdyHSV said:

Ah yes of course, didn't give it much thought You must be an engineer by trade? Great pleasure in pointing out the mistake / problem with zero interest in offering a solution

You must work with st engineers, most of us spend our lives fixing and dealing with bullst promises by non engineers.

[Jester86]

jsf said:

You must work with st engineers, most of us spend our lives fixing and dealing with bullst promises by non engineers.

This basically sums up my whole career so far

[HardtopManual]

jsf said:

You must work with st engineers, most of us spend our lives fixing and dealing with bullst promises by non engineers.

Or, as we call them, the sales team.

[Maxdecel]

HardtopManual said:

jsf said:

You must work with st engineers, most of us spend our lives fixing and dealing with bullst promises by non engineers.

Or, as we call them, the sales team.

So true.

[Gad-Westy]

Maxdecel said:

HardtopManual said:

jsf said:

You must work with st engineers, most of us spend our lives fixing and dealing with bullst promises by non engineers.

Or, as we call them, the sales team.

So true.

[Sandpit Steve]

HardtopManual said:

jsf said:

You must work with st engineers, most of us spend our lives fixing and dealing with bullst promises by non engineers.

Or, as we call them, the sales team.

[SturdyHSV]

jsf said:

SturdyHSV said:

Ah yes of course, didn't give it much thought You must be an engineer by trade? Great pleasure in pointing out the mistake / problem with zero interest in offering a solution

You must work with st engineers, most of us spend our lives fixing and dealing with bullst promises by non engineers.

It was tongue in cheek, surely you're aware that the rest of a business normally perceives the engineers as the difficult people that always point out why something won't work?

Don't get me wrong, it's perfectly valid, just some of the more 'engineery' ones perhaps lack the skill or the will to deliver such news in a manner the sales / management types respond well to.

Work somewhere without any customers, it's fantastic

[jsf]

SturdyHSV said:

It was tongue in cheek, surely you're aware that the rest of a business normally perceives the engineers as the difficult people that always point out why something won't work?

Don't get me wrong, it's perfectly valid, just some of the more 'engineery' ones perhaps lack the skill or the will to deliver such news in a manner the sales / management types respond well to.

Work somewhere without any customers, it's fantastic

That's because they are morons who don't like the truth getting in the way of their nonsense.

You may think you are being amusing, but posts like yours are why UK never pays engineers properly (and why Germany and the USA are miles ahead on tech wages and turning engineering ideas into products).

One of the few areas where engineering is valued and is seen as the answer to the problem is F1, but even in motorsport, most engineers are underpaid for the skill they bring to the job and how important they are to not killing people.