4041 replies to this topic

[GlenP]

This whole "Qualifying doesn't matter" is a myth.

Only a fool thinks it doesn't matter.

Only a complete idiot thinks you get points for it.

[fieraku]

Races won from pole position

2009 - 9 (52.9%) qualifying with race fuel.
2010 - 8 (42.1%)
2011 - 9 (47.4%)
2012 - 2 (50.0%) to date

No signs of a trend there. Indeed if you go deeper and look at all quali positions there is still no significant change in terms of correlation between starting position and finishing positons.

2008 14 overtakes per GP
2011 60
2012 70


Which means what? Think hard.

[Juggles]

Not really. Button was only trailed LH by three points with three to go that season. He was only a hand full of points away from likely being supported as McLarens contender for the wdc in final three races. He definitely wasn't dominated!

I specifically said in my original post that I expected Button to be fairly close to Hamilton in the 2010 points table. To his credit, he was even closer than I expected. I was using the word "dominated" to refer to their comparable performances in races. The reason Button was close to Hamilton in points terms is because in a number of races he finished right behind Hamilton, not because he finished ahead of him. For example, during Hamilton's mid-season run of 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd (Turkey, Canada, Valencia, Britain) Button managed a run of 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 4th. This is admirable consistency, and it shows that if Hamilton had failed in any of those races Button would have been there to pick up the pieces. Your point about Button trailing Hamilton by three points with three to go proves my point quite well. In the block of three races (Italy, Singapore, Japan) before the final three Hamilton had two DNFs and a gear issue, but he was still ahead in the points.

In normal conditions, Button just could not beat Hamilton. That is why I used the word "dominated." It is also why I think the tyres must be playing a part in the battle between the two McLarens. I completely accept that other factors may have brought Button closer to Hamilton in the races (whether it's Button being at his preferred height in the cockpit, more input into the design direction of the car or just general evolution as a driver), but I also believe that the Pirellis have played at least some part.

I also think it's bizarre to try to use 2009 as proof of Button's supposed mediocrity as some are doing. Winning six out of the first seven races is seriously impressive in any car. I think the pressure of having one hand on the WDC so early in the season would prevent any driver from racing as freely as normal. Button is undeniably a very good driver. I just think Hamilton is better.

[robefc]

I dunno, he does have a lot of lock ups and minor offs.

I assumed we were talking about significant mistakes that lead to DNF or loss of positions, lewis's minor lock ups don't usually cost much time if at all and I don't agree with the offs tbh. I suppose you could argue the lock ups harm his tyres but I don't see much evidence of this.

[Dunder]

2008 14 overtakes per GP
2011 60
2012 70


Which means what? Think hard.

It means that there are currently a lot of 'cheap' overtakes with DRS and with drivers passing cars just after having pitted for fresh rubber.
I don't know the 2011/2012 numbers for passes for position where drivers are on the same strategy. Is it significantly different to 2010?

[fieraku]

This whole "Qualifying doesn't matter" is a myth.

You haven't been watching have you? Cars in Q3 sitting.Alonso being asked on the radio whether he'd prefer P11 and fresh tires vs Q3 entry,cars making +5/10/15 spots is common now.


"Qualifying" includes all 24 cars not only the top3. So yeah whether Qualifying 5th,8th or 14th it has meant nothing and what tires you have available or how they work is everything.

[Watkins74]

You haven't been watching have you? Cars in Q3 sitting.Alonso being asked on the radio whether he'd prefer P11 and fresh tires vs Q3 entry,cars making +5/10/15 spots is common now.


"Qualifying" includes all 24 cars not only the top3. So yeah whether Qualifying 5th,8th or 14th it has meant nothing and what tires you have available or how they work is everything.

I watch and I also understand. Let me explain it you. The reason they sit in Q3 is because they know that their ultimate Qualifying position wont really change if they go out on track or stay in the garage.

McLaren and Red Bull seem to be on my side because I have yet to see them not participate in Q3.

Maybe you can explain to them your secret strategy.

[as65p]

Races won from pole position

2009 - 9 (52.9%) qualifying with race fuel.
2010 - 8 (42.1%)
2011 - 9 (47.4%)
2012 - 2 (50.0%) to date

No signs of a trend there. Indeed if you go deeper and look at all quali positions there is still no significant change in terms of correlation between starting position and finishing positons.

2008 14 overtakes per GP
2011 60
2012 70


Which means what? Think hard.

It means that whatever the rules, tyres, gimmicks over a meaningful sample of races, the fastest (best) team driver combo will come out on top.

What a surprise, eh?

[robefc]

I watch and I also understand. Let me explain it you. The reason they sit in Q3 is because they know that their ultimate Qualifying position wont really change if they go out on track or stay in the garage.

McLaren and Red Bull seem to be on my side because I have yet to see them not participate in Q3.

Maybe you can explain to them your secret strategy.

There is an interesting dichotomy between the 'much easier to win from pole' mindset and the 'don't burn another set of tyres and we can come through the field' mindset shown by lotus in bahrain. Also last year with Webber in china. I think it's too much of a risk for macca, RB etc but it might be an option they're considering.

[WitnessX]

2nd half of 2009 was difficult because of balance problems mainly in quali therefore hurting his races.

Well it wasn't just that - an awful lot of incidents occurred:
Caution: Bear in mind that qualifying in 2009 was under race-start fuel conditions.

Silverstone 6 - Misunderstanding ("OK") between engineers leads to them aborting his hot lap (where he was up on his time)
Nürbergring 3 - Weather change during qualifying.
Hungary 8 - Massa incident, held in pits in Q3 for rework on suspension, overfueled for q. attempt.
Valencia 5 - Own mistake (braking)
Spa - 14, cold tyre problems (Lewis=12)
Monza 6 - High fuel load.
Singapore 12 - Ride height problem, Tyre pressures dropped for Q2, car bottomed out under braking.
Japan 7 (start position 10 after penalties applied) - Qualy lap done under yellow flag and through debris.
Brasil 14 - Weather changes (Lewis=18)
Abu Dhabi 5. (no incident!)

[enrm6]

I'm not baffled in the slightest. It's been discussed in length since he came to F1, that Hamilton's main strength is not is qualifying, but his race pace. Button got put to the sword in 2010 with JB fans excuses ten fold. He struggled with tyre temps, he needs a perfect car, qualifying is a weakness, he doesn't like over steer, he wasn't comfortable in the car etc etc etc. Then from 2011 onwards Hamilton's race pace has disappeared. With retrospective analysis it is clear as to the reasons why and hardly rocket science, why Hamilton struggled post 2010. The evidence is clear. I for one have not harped on with any other excuse except for the tyres. 2010, qualifying pace replicated during the races exactly like 2007 to 2009. Cue 2011 all of a sudden it is gone? Even if one hasn't heard of the concept Ockhams razor, even a modicum of common-sense would come to the same conclusion.

But oh no. We are led to believe it is the magical improvement in Jensons' race pace, while IGNORING the now universally acknowledged fact, the tyres cannot be pushed, or race hard on, for any sustained period and racing IS a tyre management exercise. But alas the obfuscation, strawman arguments are limitless, when it comes to explaining JB's lack of qualifying pace, but major improvement in race pace. Where was JB's race pace in 2009, when his car was no longer a monster, but merely one of the best cars? He was nowhere. But alas there could be no excuses like he was uncomfortable in the car etc etc. The last 10 races of the season when he had a top 1, 2 and 3 car depending on the circuit. He was just slow. Maybe because in those days, you actually had to put your foot to the floor and drive flat out. A bit like qualifying.

So what you're saying, if I paraphrase:

Lewis is the faster driver of the Lewis / Jenson pairing as evidenced by the 'thrashing' Jenson got in 2010.
We can not debate that view further as additional evidence from 2011/2012 (or any future years whilst we have tyres of this nature) is inadmissable as drivers can no longer race, and instead have to drive around at a predetermined pace.
QED.

[fieraku]

It means that there are currently a lot of 'cheap' overtakes with DRS and with drivers passing cars just after having pitted for fresh rubber.
I don't know the 2011/2012 numbers for passes for position where drivers are on the same strategy. Is it significantly different to 2010?

Which means? ..........Q is irrelevant most of the time,unlike the pre Pirelli/DRS era which is the point.

The top ten finishers combined including the lost (negative) positions have gained a combined 149 positions so far.
You won't find 4 wet races combined where this phenomenon has ever happened before.,guarantee it

[as65p]

There is an interesting dichotomy between the 'much easier to win from pole' mindset and the 'don't burn another set of tyres and we can come through the field' mindset shown by lotus in bahrain. Also last year with Webber in china. I think it's too much of a risk for macca, RB etc but it might be an option they're considering.

Don't think Lotus was on the podium due to their strategy but rather because they were fast. As is the case most of the time, everything works if you can lap fast, nothing if you're slow. Best example is with what Brawn / MS got away at Ferrari when the car was dominant. That same combo hasn't been able to do anything recently with a slow(ish) car.

In that sense, I always felt strategy is overrated.

[fieraku]

It means that whatever the rules, tyres, gimmicks over a meaningful sample of races, the fastest (best) team driver combo will come out on top.

What a surprise, eh?

Then why these "Fast" drivers are qualifying so low eh?

[PretentiousBread]

Lewis's mistakes don't generally have anything to do with holding his pace too close to the edge though do they? Monza 09 apart.

Exactly, I remember the last time I tried to argue that Hamilton's wet weather pace was amazing, I got the predictably stupid "He wasn't fast when he was crashing into Button at Canada" type replies which only are avoiding the subject. Race pace and race craft are two separate definitions. When someone talks about race-pace they're obviously just talking about ability to lap a car fast around a track for a sustained period of time.

And addressing the point, how many times does Hamilton make errors all by himself i.e. a spin or an off when at full flight in a race? I think considerably less than the vast majority of the field.

Edited by PretentiousBread, 27 April 2012 - 14:07.

[fieraku]

This pretty much settles ''pace'' and ''speed''

"The biggest difference this year is that the field has become so compact - and it has become difficult to define the first pit stop time," he said. "It is nearly impossible to not fall behind traffic now.

"Last year the top cars were going away and were able to stop in clear air, but now it is much more difficult.

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/99168

[Dunder]

Which means? ..........Q is irrelevant most of the time,unlike the pre Pirelli/DRS era which is the point.

The top ten finishers combined including the lost (negative) positions have gained a combined 149 positions so far.
You won't find 4 wet races combined where this phenomenon has ever happened before.,guarantee it

I could twist and turn that in any number of ways but I won't. The field is closely bunched in terms of ultimate (qualifying) speed and there can be advantages to saving tyres, no-one disputes that.

Regardless, I really am not seeing what point you are trying to make. You believe that "qualifying is irrelevant most of the time" and that "the racing is fake" but you still have not a go at explaining why Alonso consistently dominates Massa or why Vettel gets the better of Webber in all conditions.

Likewise, 2011 did not throw up any new race winners and the championship top 7 were the same as in 2010 (with only small differences in the order) - oh and by the way 6 of those are in this year's top 7 already despite the apparent randomness.

Put simply, your beliefs are not consistent with the actual results.

Edited by Dunder, 27 April 2012 - 14:43.

[Rinehart]

Stunning. This is the first time I can ever remember Ragged Edge thinking (s)he has been PROVEN right about ANYTHING and my word, what a performance!!!

The trouble is you are NOT right TRE, because your central premise is that the tyres have limited the ability of drivers to drive to the maximum, which is therefore specifically disadvantageous to HAMILTON because he is faster in a race. But how do you know that? That has NOT been proven or even consistently demonstrated. All you have is drivers like MS and NR saying that they have to look after their tyres too much in a race WHICH WE ALREADY KNEW. Your saying you KNEW that the racing was fake, contrived etc all along, but it seems to me it is you for whom the penny has dropped - as if the rest of us weren't having exactly the same conversations about grooved tyres a decade ago example. In this case you have NOTHING that says this disadvantages Hamilton MORE than Button, or Vettel or anyone else. It could even be more advantageous to Hamilton because lower limit racing increases his consistency...

And whilst on the subject, how do you square this "PROVEN" FACT of yours with the ACTUAL FACT that Hamilton was not as quick as Button in the race in say Australia. Are you saying Hamilton couldn't even keep up with a pace that was according to you only 80% of what he was capable of???

Yes the tyres are limiting performance. Yes this is not 100% pure racing - but is it ever. But no, this doesn't mean you can assume that it is therefore not a challenge the drivers aren't earning their bread or it proves anything to duel your propaganda.

The rules are what they are. The effect of tyres has evolved over the last say 5 years and Button and Hamilton have looked fairly equal under ALL CONDITIONS over that time. That is the fact which puts the pin in your balloon.

Carry on with your self congratulations by all means.

[halifaxf1fan]

I specifically said in my original post that I expected Button to be fairly close to Hamilton in the 2010 points table. To his credit, he was even closer than I expected. I was using the word "dominated" to refer to their comparable performances in races. The reason Button was close to Hamilton in points terms is because in a number of races he finished right behind Hamilton, not because he finished ahead of him. For example, during Hamilton's mid-season run of 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd (Turkey, Canada, Valencia, Britain) Button managed a run of 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 4th. This is admirable consistency, and it shows that if Hamilton had failed in any of those races Button would have been there to pick up the pieces. Your point about Button trailing Hamilton by three points with three to go proves my point quite well. In the block of three races (Italy, Singapore, Japan) before the final three Hamilton had two DNFs and a gear issue, but he was still ahead in the points.

In normal conditions, Button just could not beat Hamilton. That is why I used the word "dominated." It is also why I think the tyres must be playing a part in the battle between the two McLarens. I completely accept that other factors may have brought Button closer to Hamilton in the races (whether it's Button being at his preferred height in the cockpit, more input into the design direction of the car or just general evolution as a driver), but I also believe that the Pirellis have played at least some part.

I also think it's bizarre to try to use 2009 as proof of Button's supposed mediocrity as some are doing. Winning six out of the first seven races is seriously impressive in any car. I think the pressure of having one hand on the WDC so early in the season would prevent any driver from racing as freely as normal. Button is undeniably a very good driver. I just think Hamilton is better.

Quite true that Hamilton is the better driver of the two on any given day. However Button is the driver that the team can better count on for results where Hamilton is a bit of a train wreck when it comes to making impulsive decisions and his inability to perform under pressure.

If you say Hamilton 'dominated' JB in 2010 then perhaps it then can be said that Jenson 'terrorized' Lewis that year. Button was always there, unshakeable, waiting to take advantage of Hamilton's every mistake while keeping it tight on the points charts. Hamilton just didn't and still doesn't have an answer for Button.

[TheBunk]

Stunning. This is the first time I can ever remember Ragged Edge thinking (s)he has been PROVEN right about ANYTHING and my word, what a performance!!!

The trouble is you are NOT right TRE, because your central premise is that the tyres have limited the ability of drivers to drive to the maximum, which is therefore specifically disadvantageous to HAMILTON because he is faster in a race. But how do you know that? That has NOT been proven or even consistently demonstrated. All you have is drivers like MS and NR saying that they have to look after their tyres too much in a race WHICH WE ALREADY KNEW. Your saying you KNEW that the racing was fake, contrived etc all along, but it seems to me it is you for whom the penny has dropped - as if the rest of us weren't having exactly the same conversations about grooved tyres a decade ago example. In this case you have NOTHING that says this disadvantages Hamilton MORE than Button, or Vettel or anyone else. It could even be more advantageous to Hamilton because lower limit racing increases his consistency...

And whilst on the subject, how do you square this "PROVEN" FACT of yours with the ACTUAL FACT that Hamilton was not as quick as Button in the race in say Australia. Are you saying Hamilton couldn't even keep up with a pace that was according to you only 80% of what he was capable of???

Yes the tyres are limiting performance. Yes this is not 100% pure racing - but is it ever. But no, this doesn't mean you can assume that it is therefore not a challenge the drivers aren't earning their bread or it proves anything to duel your propaganda.

The rules are what they are. The effect of tyres has evolved over the last say 5 years and Button and Hamilton have looked fairly equal under ALL CONDITIONS over that time. That is the fact which puts the pin in your balloon.

Carry on with your self congratulations by all means.

[tommyhjortasen]

I bet that Jenson will end at top even this year. Lewis is to insecure and unexperienced to the setup thing. That´s an explanation to why he wanted to test next week, all advatage over Jenson is good.

But the ting is that Jenson got seven moore years of experience than Lewis.

But for sure, Lewis is often faster in quali than Jenson.

[TheBunk]

Quite true that Hamilton is the better driver of the two on any given day. However Button is the driver that the team can better count on for results where Hamilton is a bit of a train wreck when it comes to making impulsive decisions and his inability to perform under pressure.

If you say Hamilton 'dominated' JB in 2010 then perhaps it then can be said that Jenson 'terrorized' Lewis that year. Button was always there, unshakeable, waiting to take advantage of Hamilton's every mistake while keeping it tight on the points charts. Hamilton just didn't and still doesn't have an answer for Button.

Actually, after the first 6 races of 2010, it was Button 2 wins - Hamilton zero wins. Over the entire season it was 2 wins each. Edit: actually Lewis won 3 races that season.

Currently in 2012 after 4 races its Button 1 win and Hamilton zero. Perhaps that explains some of these tyre rants, as as65p already pointed out

Edited by TheBunk, 27 April 2012 - 15:39.

[fieraku]

I could twist and turn that in any number of ways but I won't. The field is closely bunched in terms of ultimate (qualifying) speed and there can be advantages to saving tyres, no-one disputes that.

Regardless, I really am not seeing what point you are trying to make. You believe that "qualifying is irrelevant most of the time" and that "the racing is fake" but you still have not a go at explaining why Alonso consistently dominates Massa or why Vettel gets the better of Webber in all conditions.

Likewise, 2011 did not throw up any new race winners and the championship top 7 were the same as in 2010 (with only small differences in the order) - oh and by the way 6 of those are in this year's top 7 already despite the apparent randomness.

Put simply, your beliefs are not consistent with the actual results.

Really,Alonso&Massa? FA dominated Massa with BStones and Pirellis Quali and Race,so the logical conclusion is Massa is a mediocre driver who's been uderperforming.And lets not forget Massa is a bonafide #2.

Now as to JB&LH,well Lewis out performed JB in 2010 Quali and Race and he never looked in trouble or challenged even though JB was right behind.Come 2011 he still out qualifies JB but there are races he has nothing no pace and is even told to "Drive slower" and "Webber is 5secs ahead but we need to look after tires"

Lewis never did not attack or drive slow or not have pace,NEVER.And I should not have to explain why Alonso > Massa,as it's totally irrelevant due to the fact that FM has been consistently bad.

So you think NR&MSC are making things up saying what they did?What more do you need?

"Formula 1 teams are convinced that improving strategy calls will be the key factor going forwards if they are to make the most of the current Pirelli tyres.

With an increased focus on the impact that Pirelli's 2012 tyres are having on the racing, there have been some suggestions that the variability of performance this year is turning F1 into a lottery."
Autosport

So people complained that before passing was done through "strategy" but in the pits and there was little passing,BUT,drivers went flat out and the fastest Q&Race combo was awarded.You had to be fast to make it work,we often heard from X team "We need 10-15 Quali laps.

Now passing or most of it is again a factor because of "strategy" and DRS.Why is it fake for me? Because it's got nothing with being fast,speed or driver skill. It's all about working the tires all the time.

Teams themselves agree.

[robefc]

Don't think Lotus was on the podium due to their strategy but rather because they were fast. As is the case most of the time, everything works if you can lap fast, nothing if you're slow. Best example is with what Brawn / MS got away at Ferrari when the car was dominant. That same combo hasn't been able to do anything recently with a slow(ish) car.

In that sense, I always felt strategy is overrated.

True to a certain extent but Kimi's pace was also down to fresher tyres, no? If I recall rightly vettel was just as fast in the last stint when they were on similarly used tyres?

[fieraku]

Quite true that Hamilton is the better driver of the two on any given day. However Button is the driver that the team can better count on for results where Hamilton is a bit of a train wreck when it comes to making impulsive decisions and his inability to perform under pressure.

If you say Hamilton 'dominated' JB in 2010 then perhaps it then can be said that Jenson 'terrorized' Lewis that year. Button was always there, unshakeable, waiting to take advantage of Hamilton's every mistake while keeping it tight on the points charts. Hamilton just didn't and still doesn't have an answer for Button.

Go watch Germany 2011 once more but this time "listen" carefully! Why? Because it's the only race which the words DEGRADATION and CONSERVE your tires are never mentioned.

Then look at the results.It can't be a coincidence that even in 2011 Lewis was the Lewis of old in such races,can it? As for who has an answer to who,well flipping a coin might as well be more informative to understanding Pirelli Lotto and which driver is best.

[robefc]

Quite true that Hamilton is the better driver of the two on any given day. However Button is the driver that the team can better count on for results where Hamilton is a bit of a train wreck when it comes to making impulsive decisions and his inability to perform under pressure.

If you say Hamilton 'dominated' JB in 2010 then perhaps it then can be said that Jenson 'terrorized' Lewis that year. Button was always there, unshakeable, waiting to take advantage of Hamilton's every mistake while keeping it tight on the points charts. Hamilton just didn't and still doesn't have an answer for Button.

Erm Lewis didn't have an answer to button in 2010 and was terrorised by him despite finishing ahead of him in the WDC? Am I misunderstanding your point?

[TallyHo]

And whilst on the subject, how do you square this "PROVEN" FACT of yours with the ACTUAL FACT that Hamilton was not as quick as Button in the race in say Australia. Are you saying Hamilton couldn't even keep up with a pace that was according to you only 80% of what he was capable of???

Exactly, Button blew Hamilton away in the first few laps in Melbourne, which had nothing to do with tyre deg, and do the Ham fans seriously believe he was trying to keep to some Lap time delta while his team mate was making him eat his dust?

[P123]

Erm Lewis didn't have an answer to button in 2010 and was terrorised by him despite finishing ahead of him in the WDC? Am I misunderstanding your point?

I'm quite happy for people like Halifax to view Hamilton as the underdog. JB is certainly stiff competition.

What's strange in this topic is the respective sides that are being taken regarding the tyres. So far this season it is Button who has had more troubles with the tyres. Malaysia, China qualifying and worse pace and degradation in Bahrain. If the tyre perfromance remains as unpredictable all season then that may overall be an advantage for Hamilton.

[Dunder]

Go watch Germany 2011 once more but this time "listen" carefully! Why? Because it's the only race which the words DEGRADATION and CONSERVE your tires are never mentioned.

Then look at the results.It can't be a coincidence that even in 2011 Lewis was the Lewis of old in such races,can it? As for who has an answer to who,well flipping a coin might as well be more informative to understanding Pirelli Lotto and which driver is best.

No question that the unusually low temperatures made preservation less of a factor (and the prime tyre pretty much useless) but it was still a three stop race. Nonetheless, Lewis appears to have a slightly different opinion and do bear in mind that you only hear a fraction of the radio comms.


Q: Lewis, where did your extra margins come from? How much was down to the car and how much was down to you?

Hamilton: Well, I think none of us can win without the car. I think bit by bit just learning more about the how the car is behaving and with the driving style I was able to learn to look after the tyres a little bit more.

http://www.grandprix.../r849sunpc.html

[Lights]

What's strange in this topic is the respective sides that are being taken regarding the tyres. So far this season it is Button who has had more troubles with the tyres. Malaysia, China qualifying and worse pace and degradation in Bahrain. If the tyre perfromance remains as unpredictable all season then that may overall be an advantage for Hamilton.

You're just really not understanding this. You see, when Button has trouble with his tyres, it's because of his own shortcomings. When Hamilton has trouble with his tyres, Pirelli must make different ones.

[gricey1981]

Exactly, Button blew Hamilton away in the first few laps in Melbourne, which had nothing to do with tyre deg, and do the Ham fans seriously believe he was trying to keep to some Lap time delta while his team mate was making him eat his dust?

It does seem that whoever gets into the 1st corner is able to pull a massive gap.

Look at all the starts this year.

Still a driver can only drive to the rules and since the mid way point of last year it does seem that Jenson, although maybe not as ultimately fast ,is as good as Lewis under the current rule set.

However qualifying is very important still and if Lewis can keep up the consistency he will beat Jenson over the course of a season as he is going to out qualify him most times. Especially if he is on pole and Jenson starts 3rd or lower.

[WitnessX]

Go watch Germany 2011 once more but this time "listen" carefully! Why? Because it's the only race which the words DEGRADATION and CONSERVE your tires are never mentioned.

Then look at the results.It can't be a coincidence that even in 2011 Lewis was the Lewis of old in such races,can it? As for who has an answer to who,well flipping a coin might as well be more informative to understanding Pirelli Lotto and which driver is best.

I don't quite understand what this discussion is about, but if there was "no degradation" then why was it a 3 stop and not a 1 stop strategy? The answer is that stints were short enough for degradation not to be a major issue. Take a look at Turkey 2011, on a 4 stop there were no problems either with degradation, and then look at Jenson whose tyres died at the end of his last stint on a three stop.

Look at china this year, when the McLarens beat the RBRs (3 vs. 2 stop).

There is nothing stopping Lewis doing that +1 pit-stop and doing sprints if he wants too.

Good or bad it is what it is.

Edit: Come to think of it this is analogous to the "refuelling era" where they had the choice of doing (for example) a 2 stop with slow stints inherently because of higher fuel levels or 3 lower level fuel runs with quicker lap times.

Edited by WitnessX, 27 April 2012 - 18:31.

[P123]

You're just really not understanding this. You see, when Button has trouble with his tyres, it's because of his own shortcomings. When Hamilton has trouble with his tyres, Pirelli must make different ones.

Yeah, but that's generally from the same people who believe the team are purposefully working against LH, failing to note that they've also 'failed' JB at times and operational screw ups are sadly nothing new for McLaren....

The tyres are a challenge for everybody (and an arguement can be made for it being too much of a lottery in terms of maximising their performance). I doubt any driver on the grid is 100% comfortable with them.

[tommyhjortasen]

Jenson has superior experience. Lewis had not

All talk, interesting, but not so much when the message is blatant lies. Four years in a row.

As I see it Jenson has the upper hand.

[TallyHo]

It does seem that whoever gets into the 1st corner is able to pull a massive gap.

Look at all the starts this year.

Give it a rest. If Hamilton was genuinely faster than Button in Melbourne, being behind or not TDG would have overtaken Button on track. After all as so many have pointed out "Overtaking has become so easy it's a farce". Face it, when tyre deg wasn't an issue in Melbourne Button blew Ham out of the water.

[TallyHo]

Go watch Germany 2011 once more but this time "listen" carefully! Why? Because it's the only race which the words DEGRADATION and CONSERVE your tires are never mentioned.

Then look at the results.It can't be a coincidence that even in 2011 Lewis was the Lewis of old in such races,can it? As for who has an answer to who,well flipping a coin might as well be more informative to understanding Pirelli Lotto and which driver is best.

As someone pointed out Germany was a 3 stop race. The best example you could have given for a race in 2011 with very low degradation was India where the front runners only completed 2 stops. Button passed Alonso and Webber on the first lap and then had very good pace up until the end of the race, whereas Ham couldn't even keep up with Massa, but i suppose Ham was trying to keep to a lap delta time and only driving 60% within himself .

[gricey1981]

Give it a rest. If Hamilton was genuinely faster than Button in Melbourne, being behind or not TDG would have overtaken Button on track. After all as so many have pointed out "Overtaking has become so easy it's a farce". Face it, when tyre deg wasn't an issue in Melbourne Button blew Ham out of the water.

So you are discounting all the other races on Pirellis where the leader into the 1st corner has won the race.

[tommyhjortasen]

Jenson has the upper hand.

[lewymp4]

Exactly, Button blew Hamilton away in the first few laps in Melbourne, which had nothing to do with tyre deg.

Maybe Jenson was able to beat Lewis into the first turn at Melborne, because of a problem that Hamilton had with his clutch.

http://www.racer.com...article/233025/

[gricey1981]

Jenson has the upper hand.

did you have to say it again coz deep down your really not sure of your conviction and repeating it incessantly makes you feel better about yourself

[Lazy]

I think you will find a good number of people who dont share that view...

Eg Trulli had terrible race pace versus his quali pace... but he was not usually limited by "fuel, traffic, strategy, tyres" ... he just sucked at pushing for lap after lap... not all of them are equally good at it.

You have to remember that this is the key skill that marked out top drivers in the refuelling era. and this is the era that informs the views of most of us as to what skillset an F1 driver should possess.

It is? I thought it was that processional, zero overtaking, borefest era we couldn't wait to get rid of.

[TallyHo]

Maybe Jenson was able to beat Lewis into the first turn at Melborne, because of a problem that Hamilton had with his clutch.

http://www.racer.com...article/233025/

But this still doesn't explain how JB just blew Ham away in the first 7 laps, and the rest of the race. If Ham was genuinely faster, surely he would have overtaken him or at the least been on the back of his gearbox.

[PretentiousBread]

It is? I thought it was that processional, zero overtaking, borefest era we couldn't wait to get rid of.

At what price? A contest of who can 'tip toe' around the best? Martin Brundle's words, not mine.

[fieraku]

No question that the unusually low temperatures made preservation less of a factor (and the prime tyre pretty much useless) but it was still a three stop race. Nonetheless, Lewis appears to have a slightly different opinion and do bear in mind that you only hear a fraction of the radio comms.


Q: Lewis, where did your extra margins come from? How much was down to the car and how much was down to you?

Hamilton: Well, I think none of us can win without the car. I think bit by bit just learning more about the how the car is behaving and with the driving style I was able to learn to look after the tyres a little bit more.

http://www.grandprix.../r849sunpc.html

It felt to me as if all 3 LH,MW and FA were racing, really racing just like back in the day,when I wrote that drivers weren't pushing and were driving within a delta,it was just what I felt watching the races,I guess you watch long enough you see these things.Also the characteristics of the Pirellis in 2011 were not the same every race,and on every track.At times the tires seemed "not so bad" but not great by any means. Lewis' win in China was one of the most uninspiring for me,seeing everyone fall off the cliff.

Whereas 2012 version is a joke from top to bottom and require nursing from lap 1 for 98.9% of the race,an embarrassment to F1 and to its fans.
90% of a whole GP week is about tires and finding the ''window of operation''. 20 million dollar drivers in 10 million dollar cars tittle-tattling around how to make cheap tires last while going at "just" above GP2 speeds.

[cokeb]

I don't see this "Tire lottery". 3/4 races have been won from the front row, and the one that wasn't was heavily affected by rain. The reason tires seem to matter so much is more down to the top cars being super close in pace this year without the blown diffuser. Small differences in pace simply result in bigger swings in the races.

Sorry for off-topic.

Edited by cokeb, 27 April 2012 - 21:45.

[PNSD]

In the past too, a Ferrari, Mclaren, RedBull could get setup wrong and still be within the top 6. Now because of the field bunch, a Lotus nail's setup and challenges for 1-2 whilst Mclaren, struggle to even have top 6 pace having arguably had chances to win the all of the previous races (and won one!).

It's all about hitting that setup window. And based on Bahrain I would argue Lewis will feeling pretty happy. We know he has a large operating window, he will drive a car as quick as he could if it had a wheel missing...

Jenson was ahead on track but it was as clear as day he went through his tyres quicker in Bahrain, and it was clear as day he was not as quick as Lewis for most of the race, despite being ahead for the most part.

As for the tyre debate. I do not understand how it is still going on. We have as much evidence to suggest the tyres favour Lewis as we do Jenson.

FACT is the tyres do not favour anyone. They are racing drivers, make the tyres out of concrete and im sure we'll see minimal differences between the drivers! It's time kid's stop using this excuse for their driver.

After two seasons of racing, and 4 from this season we have to enough to say that Lewis and Jenson are about as close as it gets in performance over a season. Right now, at any given weekend it could go one way, or the other. You have to say they have looked strong, Jenson's only point finishes have been a 1st and 2nd whilst Lewis has hogged the podium for the season so far.

At the moment there is no Lewis v's Jenson because as far as I can tell, they're about as equal as it can get at this level. I have ZERO doubts that the title will come down between these two, and whoever wins it will certainly get the bragging rights' and rightly so.

[PretentiousBread]

Found this snippet in an issue of Autosport from early 2011:

JB - "there will be degradation on the soft tyre and you have to look after it, but there always has to be a balance. I think with Pirelli we have a tyre that maybe suits me more than the previous tyre we had."

So please, enough of the denial about these tyres suiting JB. At the same time as he was saying this, Hamilton was saying:

"Last year we had to make tyres last with a heavier fuel load, and now it's even slower. I did a run the other day and it was painfully slow. It's just not exciting to be honest."

So again, enough of the 'Hamilton never complained about the tyres, it's all in your head' misinformation as well.

[zack1994]

Found this snippet in an issue of Autosport from early 2011:

JB - "there will be degradation on the soft tyre and you have to look after it, but there always has to be a balance. I think with Pirelli we have a tyre that maybe suits me more than the previous tyre we had."

So please, enough of the denial about these tyres suiting JB. At the same time as he was saying this, Hamilton was saying:

"Last year we had to make tyres last with a heavier fuel load, and now it's even slower. I did a run the other day and it was painfully slow. It's just not exciting to be honest."

So again, enough of the 'Hamilton never complained about the tyres, it's all in your head' misinformation as well.

Jenson's saying he thinks he'll be able do look after the tyres better than others, but since then have we seen that. Not really
Ted kravits asked jenson about the degradation in bahrain and he/JB said the way the tyres are should help me but did they.
Just because jenson thinks somethings going to happen doesn't mean it will.

Did lewis say they were hindering his style.

[halifaxf1fan]

Erm Lewis didn't have an answer to button in 2010 and was terrorised by him despite finishing ahead of him in the WDC? Am I misunderstanding your point?

Actually I think both terms are exaggerated which is why I put them in quotation marks. Button wasn't dominated in 2010 but he was beaten! The problem for Hamilton was that he was expected to dominate and didn't.

[Lazy]

At what price? A contest of who can 'tip toe' around the best? Martin Brundle's words, not mine.

Yeah, he's also said that we are having fantastic racing. Degradation of various aspects of the car has always been an aspect of F1, good drivers can go fast and look after their car.

This tyre story is just the latest in a long list of excuses to explain why the TDG isn't winning everything.