Good Luck/Bad Luck 2012
#1
Posted 26 November 2012 - 08:56
#3
Posted 26 November 2012 - 08:58
#4
Posted 26 November 2012 - 08:59
#5
Posted 26 November 2012 - 09:03
most lucky driver was Alonso, no doubts.
shitload of bad luck Hamilton
#6
Posted 26 November 2012 - 09:10
Worst luck was Hamilton, should have had another three wins minimum.
#7
Posted 26 November 2012 - 09:26
#8
Posted 26 November 2012 - 09:28
#9
Posted 26 November 2012 - 09:34
#10
Posted 26 November 2012 - 09:35
Hamilton's luck this year has been one of the worst I've seen in F1
Yup, reminds a lot of Kimi's McLaren years.
#11
Posted 26 November 2012 - 09:44
Schumacher. When he had the car, the car or team wouldn't take him to the finish. When it was reliable, it was dead slow.
#12
Posted 26 November 2012 - 09:52
Best luck was Perez, managed to nab himself one of the primest spots on the grid before it went to ratshit for him.
Worst luck was Hamilton, should have had another three wins minimum.
Perez got 3 podiums and a McLaren seat by risky strategies.
On the other hands, Kobayashi haven't find a next seat even though he showed almost same performance as Perez.
Additionally oil on his 3rd starting grid(China), 1st lap nutcased from 2nd grid(Belgium), many slow pitstops and no successful risky strategy...
#13
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:07
Actually the likes of Raikkonen seems to have been way more able to collect from the luck, with a lot of retirements ahead of him and such. Not that I think he's been specially lucky either.
#14
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:08
Hamilton. No question.
#15
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:18
One less Hamilton car failure and he missed the points to win.
Or one less Vettel's car failure, when Alonso gained 7 points in Valencia. Unless you want to look at team failures as deserved for the drivers, since it's team sport, which is absolutely right approach as well.
Anyway, I voted Perez. Poor qualifying and wet conditions turned into his favour. Except for these 3 podiums all Perez achieved was 8th, 9th and 10th. Is it really enough for McLaren seat? I enjoyed Kobayashi this year more. Tell you what, even Di Resta, that recieves so much hate on these forums, would be better for McLaren.
#16
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:29
Vettel, very rare to have race-ending incidents and survive as if nothing had happened several times. Didn't get a DNF because of someone else.
Hamilton, very difficult to have such a good car and skills and such an incompetent team.
#17
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:30
Alonso had the best luck by Macca and Red Bull having troubles enough to give him a shot at WDC.
Alonso had the worst luck by not quite getting there.
This is not rocket science folks.
#18
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:33
Worst luck: Hamilton, no contest. I am certain that he would have been this year's champion had it not been for reliability and operational errors, and I actually think that he drove the best season of anybody.
#19
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:45
It is luck for the opponent who's car doesn't experience same fate.
Advertisement
#20
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:47
Bad luck. Obviously Hamilton.
Edited by sopa, 26 November 2012 - 10:48.
#21
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:50
#22
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:53
I'd say that was pretty lucky not to have ripped the tyre off the rim at the very very least.
#23
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:54
Many of you seem to attribute luck factor to reliability problems when it is the drivers own car breaking down. That's not bad luck -- that's an error some place down the assembly line or manufacturing process resulting in the mishap. Nothing to do with luck, but in quality control -- or lack thereof.
It is luck for the opponent who's car doesn't experience same fate.
You contradict yourself here.
1. Breakdowns are not due to bad luck.
2. The one not breaking down has luck.
@pic above. I rest my case. That whole RedBull is made of rubber to flex around crashes
Edited by SenorSjon, 26 November 2012 - 10:55.
#24
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:54
Luckiest. Raikkonen. No reliability problems, getting caught in collisions all season, finished all races. He is above Alonso in luck-list, because Alonso got taken out by Grosjean.
Bad luck. Obviously Hamilton.
Well, one could argue that it was Kimi's race craft that kept him out of trouble not a matter of luck (I try to be polite here) . Prime example of it was in the very last race when he avoided hitting Vettel.
As to reliability and luck, see my previous post.
#25
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:55
Many of you seem to attribute luck factor to reliability problems when it is the drivers own car breaking down. That's not bad luck -- that's an error some place down the assembly line or manufacturing process resulting in the mishap. Nothing to do with luck, but in quality control -- or lack thereof.
It is luck for the opponent who's car doesn't experience same fate.
So you are saying that fortune plays no part in whether that part finds its way onto your car or your teammate's machine?
#26
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:56
Bad luck:
Ham (sometimes forcing the bad luck like in Valencia)
Alo for having a slow car in qualy
#27
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:58
You contradict yourself here.
1. Breakdowns are not due to bad luck.
2. The one not breaking down has luck.
Err,
If your opponent fails to finish for whatever reason -- and that opponent very likely would be ahead of you -- you got a lucky break.
If your car is unreliable -- your team has an issue with quality control/car design -- whatever. But not bad luck.
Isn't the difference obvious?
#28
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:58
Well, one could argue that it was Kimi's race craft that kept him out of trouble not a matter of luck (I try to be polite here) . Prime example of it was in the very last race when he avoided hitting Vettel.
As to reliability and luck, see my previous post.
Sometimes you are lucky and unlucky and you can do nothing about it. Spa start crash is a prime example of that. Even Kimi wouldn't have had the ability to escape this if he was at a wrong place. So yes, he was lucky that he never was at a wrong place at a wrong time.
Tp prove my point that Kimi hasn't the uber-skills of keeping drivers away from him. If you remember the start at Suzuka, Kimi couldn't avoid Alonso turning into him. He was actually fortunate to escape only with a slight damage to front wing.
#29
Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:59
I'd say that was pretty lucky not to have ripped the tyre off the rim at the very very least.
That picture says it all.
If that had been Hamilton,all four wheels would have popped off and maybe one of them would have landed on his motorhome
#30
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:00
Vettel. Even when things looked bleak his RB proved indestructible and he had the luck of champions. One less Hamilton car failure and he missed the points to win. Starting at the back in which is normally a snoozefest he saw drivers hitting each other, banter noses off and scoring flat tires in the first lap. He hit a driver and a board and still it wasn't fatal. In Brazil he got hit twice, the others hit the showers and his car survived again.
People seem to notice only one side of the coin:
He was unlucky at Abu Dhabi (Had to start from back..and it wasn't his fault)
He was unlucky that he had those contacts at Brazil (again not his fault)
In both cases he needed good luck, because he already had bad luck.
It's like Monaco 2011: People were crying how lucky Vettel was with that red flag, but they all forgot that Vettel had been unlucky earlier (Bad pit stop, bad timing for SC earlier).
Edited by Niceone, 26 November 2012 - 11:02.
#31
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:03
So you are saying that fortune plays no part in whether that part finds its way onto your car or your teammate's machine?
Exactly, that is what I am saying.
F1 is a pinnacle of motor racing, they are pushing the limits etc.. etc.. -- meaning there will be issues with divers things, but that is not a question of luck. Is it now?
To me it is a question of engineering excellence when all goes well and room for improvement when not. Right?
#32
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:03
#33
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:05
Worst luck: hard to choose between Hamilton, Kobayashi and Schumacher.
Edited by XOR, 26 November 2012 - 11:08.
#34
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:05
Being crashed into IS bad luck.
Fernando Alonso was the unlucky one.
#35
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:07
Bad Luck by far: Schumacher
#36
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:09
Schumi has had far worse luck than Hammy this season.
Maybe, but Schumacher's bad luck did not cost him the championship. Hamilton's probably did...
#37
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:09
Exactly, that is what I am saying.
F1 is a pinnacle of motor racing, they are pushing the limits etc.. etc.. -- meaning there will be issues with divers things, but that is not a question of luck. Is it now?
To me it is a question of engineering excellence when all goes well and room for improvement when not. Right?
Sorry, but that is not what you are saying at all. When they are manufacturing parts and a defective part passes underneath the QA radar and ends up on your car, not your teammate's, I think by most people's standards you would count yourself unlucky in that instance.
You are confusing process with outcome.
#38
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:12
Sometimes you are lucky and unlucky and you can do nothing about it. Spa start crash is a prime example of that. Even Kimi wouldn't have had the ability to escape this if he was at a wrong place. So yes, he was lucky that he never was at a wrong place at a wrong time.
Tp prove my point that Kimi hasn't the uber-skills of keeping drivers away from him. If you remember the start at Suzuka, Kimi couldn't avoid Alonso turning into him. He was actually fortunate to escape only with a slight damage to front wing.
I am only using Kimi as an example because you stated that he was the luckiest driver of the season. I fundamentally disagree. What I am not implying is that he is different from anyone else. If you are in the wrong place at the wrong time you will get taken out. Other times the driver can himself make the difference -- race craft, in other words. Kimi has that plenty, as have others, if not all of them....
To make it a question of lucky vs unlucky is to diminish the very skills of these guys who drive F1 cars to the limit.
For me that's racing, not matter of luck.
#39
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:12
Bad reliability is NOT bad luck, it's bad reliability.
Being crashed into IS bad luck.
Fernando Alonso was the unlucky one.
Perspective. That may be your definition of bad luck and I respect that. In my opinion, if I were a driver and something on my car failed, I would consider it bad luck. In Hamilton's case, the first half was plagued by operational errors, and second half by mechanical reliability. That, in my view, is quite unlucky as a driver.
Advertisement
#40
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:15
I'd say that was pretty lucky not to have ripped the tyre off the rim at the very very least.
Wow, didn't realized how bad it was seeing only the replays. So lucky... That car is a tank!
#41
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:16
Sorry, but that is not what you are saying at all. When they are manufacturing parts and a defective part passes underneath the QA radar and ends up on your car, not your teammate's, I think by most people's standards you would count yourself unlucky in that instance.
You are confusing process with outcome.
Well, I am so happy you think to know what I am saying.
I said what I said. If you want to call defective part of a car breaking down as being 'unlucky' feel free. I do not.
I think you are confusing manufacturing process with a game of chance.
#42
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:17
Perspective. That may be your definition of bad luck and I respect that. In my opinion, if I were a driver and something on my car failed, I would consider it bad luck. In Hamilton's case, the first half was plagued by operational errors, and second half by mechanical reliability. That, in my view, is quite unlucky as a driver.
Another way of putting it: to be F1 World Champion, you need to have a part of luck.
If Alonso had been lucky, he would be World Champion. If Hamilton had been lucky, he still wouldn't have been World Champion, because his team didn't do a good enough job (failed pit stops + reliability woes).
That's my point.
Edited by Ravenak, 26 November 2012 - 11:17.
#43
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:20
#44
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:23
But if the team makes an engineering mistake, that's the driver's bad luck, isn't it?F1 is a pinnacle of motor racing, they are pushing the limits etc.. etc.. -- meaning there will be issues with divers things, but that is not a question of luck. Is it now?
#45
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:28
Best luck was Perez, managed to nab himself one of the primest spots on the grid before it went to ratshit for him.
[...]
hehe, interesting point and quite true
#46
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:29
But if the team makes an engineering mistake, that's the driver's bad luck, isn't it?
HRT drivers are so unlucky
#47
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:30
They would be if they deserved to be in F1.HRT drivers are so unlucky
#48
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:31
Vettel same thing - alternator failure, start from pitlane, first lap crash in Brazil - all lucky.
There are other drivers than Alo, Hami and Vettel in the field.
Hami has been most unlucky guy this year - I'd agree with that, Schumi also but when I remember some of his crashes it kinda fades away.
Edited by majkel, 26 November 2012 - 11:32.
#49
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:31
If Alonso had been lucky, he would be World Champion. If Hamilton had been lucky, he still wouldn't have been World Champion, because his team didn't do a good enough job (failed pit stops + reliability woes).
Maldonado, Hulk and Germany puncture were bad luck, engine stopping while you are leading is reliability.
I don't think Vettel was the most lucky guy this season, but either wasn't Alonso. When was he actually lucky? Malaysia cuz it rained?
#50
Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:32
They would be if they deserved to be in F1.
Good thing that you are here to officially proclaim who deserves to be in F1 and who doesn't.