Jump to content


Photo

Michael Schumacher (merged)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
20789 replies to this topic

#16301 KavB

KavB
  • Member

  • 1,053 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 02 January 2012 - 19:07

Is this the final season for Schumacher? I seriously hope not. Depending on his form, I hope he can go on for a couple more seasons. It's strange to say considering he's 43 tomorrow.. If he has no intention of staying on then I hope he announces it soon so we can appreciate every race of his for the last time! :)

Advertisement

#16302 Muz Bee

Muz Bee
  • Member

  • 2,531 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 03 January 2012 - 00:07

Is this the final season for Schumacher? I seriously hope not. Depending on his form, I hope he can go on for a couple more seasons. It's strange to say considering he's 43 tomorrow.. If he has no intention of staying on then I hope he announces it soon so we can appreciate every race of his for the last time! :)

If it were any other driver with the 2010/11 scorecard that MS has returned? I would doubt you would not be calling for a replacement. To put it in perspective, I have no great desire to see Raikonnen take the place that a deserving young talent could be occupying at "Lotus".

It seems odd (to me) that there is a nostalgic theme here. MS is clearly not thrilling us with the great drives of the earlier career and looks like a midfield journeyman at best. Unlike old racing cars which still look and sound glorious when run up the hill at Goodwood, old race drivers leave me with a sense of sadness that they show none of their old sparkle.

Not meaning to offend or start a furious debate, just saying....

#16303 Richardc

Richardc
  • Member

  • 235 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 03 January 2012 - 00:20

No offence to anyone - and i'm sure of shit he wouldn't feel any.

He was very marginally outscored by a rated driver with 5 years experience, through what people that had watched carefully generally agree was bad luck, had better maximum results and showed more overtaking skill, defending skill, and racecraft. He had a few more mistakes, but a driver that is pushing for more than the place the car deserves probably will.

#16304 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 5,610 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 03 January 2012 - 01:20

If it were any other driver with the 2010/11 scorecard that MS has returned? I would doubt you would not be calling for a replacement. To put it in perspective, I have no great desire to see Raikonnen take the place that a deserving young talent could be occupying at "Lotus".

It seems odd (to me) that there is a nostalgic theme here. MS is clearly not thrilling us with the great drives of the earlier career and looks like a midfield journeyman at best. Unlike old racing cars which still look and sound glorious when run up the hill at Goodwood, old race drivers leave me with a sense of sadness that they show none of their old sparkle.

Not meaning to offend or start a furious debate, just saying....


apart from being handed his own ass in qualys, on race days I would say he was far more convincing than NR. Saying that, it was largely due to NR qualifying higher usually. But that doesn't make your post look less like you have written it half-drunk. :) I will gladly give the old guy another year to show what he is worth. If the car is not up to it, that will hurt NR way more than MS. Nostalgy? None here. It looks to me that MS has been quietly building himself up again. If I am not right, and you are, I will accept that with grace too.

#16305 Raelene

Raelene
  • Member

  • 5,293 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 03 January 2012 - 04:13

He does get alot of attention for his actions but I can think of a couple of other drivers who are more talked about, especially on forums.



you really are a newbie aren't you!!

#16306 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 23,254 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 03 January 2012 - 08:04

If it were any other driver with the 2010/11 scorecard that MS has returned? I would doubt you would not be calling for a replacement. To put it in perspective, I have no great desire to see Raikonnen take the place that a deserving young talent could be occupying at "Lotus".

After 2010 maybe, after 2011 not at all.

#16307 IsometricBacon

IsometricBacon
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 03 January 2012 - 08:08

Thats unlikely. The EBD simply hasnt worked for him, it would be easy (obviously because most people have not even noticed it) to underestimate the effect this has on his driving.


I find it strange that Michael or anyone from the team has not mentioned this problem if it were indeed true. Infact not a whisper which can only logically mean its not true and you are making it up.

#16308 IsometricBacon

IsometricBacon
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 03 January 2012 - 08:17

As mentioned by others it is the EBD and the car characteristics. The throttle or exhaust blowing must remain open on corner entry, it is the quickest way around a track as it generates downforce on entry. It completely negates the advantage that Michael has over many drivers on corner entry and exit. You can't balance the car on entry because that will alter the optimum blowing under braking as I understand. So Michael only has one option and that is to maximise corner exit and you can see this on the onboard shots, especially at Abu Dhabi, it requires being accurate on entry and a slower entry speed to maximise a better corner exit. The front end isn't strong either as seen by the understeer visible on the onboards that Brundle and Coulthard commented on so corner entry speed has to be reduced for the optimum line. Overall Michael's style has gone more to corner exit speed in 2011.

The tyre characteristics don't help much either as you can't be aggressive on corner entry as that takes too much life out of the tyres, as seen by Hamilton, which again doesn't help Michael much. The steering inputs have to be small on entry and effectively done by corner exit.



Michael losing an advantage does not explain why he was on average half a second slower that Rosberg. If you can no longer balance the car on corner entry (complete rubbish) then how is rosberg often 1 second a lap faster than Michael? Fact is, the EBD just gives you downforce, just as next year the car will have downforce without it, and it has nothing to do with eliminating the need to balance of the car on entry. There is still the need to find the limit of grip with or without an EBD.

The much larger reason why your whole post is nonsense is because Michael and his team have never uttered a single word about what you are talking about, which is strange because you would assume they would be the first ones to do so, especially considering they have never been short of excuses for him, and often last yeat he specifically said he did not understans why he was so much slower. Maybe you better email him.

What I find astounding is that someone has thrown out this excuse, and everyone here seems to be taking it seriously despite, as I said Michael or the team never mentioning it. :confused:

Edited by IsometricBacon, 03 January 2012 - 08:19.


#16309 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 23,254 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 03 January 2012 - 09:10

Michael losing an advantage does not explain why he was on average half a second slower that Rosberg. If you can no longer balance the car on corner entry (complete rubbish) then how is rosberg often 1 second a lap faster than Michael?

..and you accuse ME of making things up? Fantasy numbers pulled out of your ass dont contribute anything to a discussion.

#16310 IsometricBacon

IsometricBacon
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 03 January 2012 - 09:16

..and you accuse ME of making things up? Fantasy numbers pulled out of your ass dont contribute anything to a discussion.



Turkey qualifying he was 9 tenths slower. There were a few other races where he was around 1 second a lap slower. My point remains even if its 0.5 which was the average.

#16311 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,471 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 January 2012 - 09:21

you really are a newbie aren't you!!

I think its fairly obvious I'm not, at least not to the world of watching F1. I can appreciate up until 2006 Schuey got alot of negative views thrown his way but its no longer the case. Pointing out that I may not have been a member of this forum 'back in the day' is largely irrelevant. Perhaps its a result of the guys at the front gathering all the press and Michael is rarely there? Thats not meant as a dig towards the great man, but as soon as he sits in a competitive car and begins hassling the young guns at the front you'll soon see the negativity reappear. For now though he does not attract the same level of criticism others on the present grid get. I hope I have made my point.

From a 'newbie' to an 'old timer' without a patronizing tone.

Edited by tifosiMac, 03 January 2012 - 09:23.


#16312 Raelene

Raelene
  • Member

  • 5,293 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 03 January 2012 - 09:42

I thought it was pretty obvious I'm talking about a newbie to Forums...so apologies if that wasn't so clear..

MS has been far more talked about in forums over the years than Lewis currently is..., all the good, bad and the ugly...even during his retirement he was still talked about

Lewis has a long way to go to be up there - but he's on his way!

[quote] For now though he does not attract the same level of criticism others on the present grid get.[/qwuote]

I suggest you read the Rosberg vs Schumacher thread - some of these guys have been continuing with the same level of criticsim for years and years...

#16313 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 23,254 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 03 January 2012 - 10:16

There were a few other races where he was around 1 second a lap slower. My point remains even if its 0.5 which was the average.

No there were not 'a few other races' like that.
No it was not the average, the average was much less.

If you are going to use numbers you should try to use the REAL numbers. Go find them, come back and we might have something to talk about.

#16314 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 03 January 2012 - 16:58

Happy Birthday Michael!
To go to Jerez or not ,it is tough one. Decisions, decisions. One month to the tests. Can't wait.

Turkey qualifying he was 9 tenths slower. There were a few other races where he was around 1 second a lap slower. My point remains even if its 0.5 which was the average.

Where this come from? Nico best Q lap 1:25.574, Michael best Q lap 1:26.121. He did 1:26.038 in FP3. So, 1:26.646 form Q3 was not his best time and I am positive he could beat 1:26.000 if he wanted. But, he kept his tyres.

Edited by ivand911, 03 January 2012 - 18:41.


#16315 Tardis40

Tardis40
  • Member

  • 730 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 03 January 2012 - 17:16

Michael has obviously not done as well in qualy as Rosberg. It's redundant to even mention it. In fact, Michael was never a real ball of fire at qualifying. It took him 250 GPs to top Senna's pole record of 65 poles which was done in only 161 events. As a point of reference, Vettel already has 30 poles in only 80 races.

But you don't get any points for Saturday. Rosberg regularly over-qualified the car and as a result usually lost positions in the race, while Schumacher did just the opposite. I would suggest it comes down to tire preparation. For whatever reason Rosberg does a better job of bringing the finicky tires up to temperature without hurting them.

Now if we could have a season where Michael doesn't get taken out by rookies and the pit crew remember to tighten all his wheel nuts then perhaps we can have a better result.

PS - let's bear in mind that the car was a couple of seconds slower than the leaders and very often didn't even finish on the lead lap.

Edited by Tardis40, 03 January 2012 - 17:17.


#16316 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 03 January 2012 - 17:29

In fact, Michael was never a real ball of fire at qualifying.


Actually except for Senna the rest of the multiple WDC's fit about there as well.

The qualy argument is about all the haters have to grip too now, let them have a little fun :lol:

#16317 tyker

tyker
  • Member

  • 207 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 03 January 2012 - 21:02

Turkey qualifying he was 9 tenths slower. There were a few other races where he was around 1 second a lap slower. My point remains even if its 0.5 which was the average.



No there were not 'a few other races' like that.
No it was not the average, the average was much less.

If you are going to use numbers you should try to use the REAL numbers. Go find them, come back and we might have something to talk about.



Happy Birthday Michael!
To go to Jerez or not ,it is tough one. Decisions, decisions. One month to the tests. Can't wait.


Where this come from? Nico best Q lap 1:25.574, Michael best Q lap 1:26.121. He did 1:26.038 in FP3. So, 1:26.646 form Q3 was not his best time and I am positive he could beat 1:26.000 if he wanted. But, he kept his tyres.

No Turkey is not correct but there were a few races where Rosberg was a second or close to a second quicker, the biggest gaps being:-
1.132s
1.002s
0.917s
0.782s
0.754s

The average was also correct it being 0.49s

Michael has obviously not done as well in qualy as Rosberg. It's redundant to even mention it. In fact, Michael was never a real ball of fire at qualifying. It took him 250 GPs to top Senna's pole record of 65 poles which was done in only 161 events. As a point of reference, Vettel already has 30 poles in only 80 races.

But you don't get any points for Saturday. Rosberg regularly over-qualified the car and as a result usually lost positions in the race, while Schumacher did just the opposite. I would suggest it comes down to tire preparation. For whatever reason Rosberg does a better job of bringing the finicky tires up to temperature without hurting them.

Now if we could have a season where Michael doesn't get taken out by rookies and the pit crew remember to tighten all his wheel nuts then perhaps we can have a better result.

PS - let's bear in mind that the car was a couple of seconds slower than the leaders and very often didn't even finish on the lead lap.



Actually except for Senna the rest of the multiple WDC's fit about there as well.

The qualy argument is about all the haters have to grip too now, let them have a little fun :lol:

Actually Schumacher has always been an excellent qualifier regularly beating his teammates easily

Edited by tyker, 03 January 2012 - 21:03.


#16318 Rambazamba

Rambazamba
  • Member

  • 356 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 03 January 2012 - 21:32

and the pole/race ratio says nothing about his qualifying strength if we compare him to Senna or Vettel.
With the current qualifying rule or the old 60 minutes quali during 100% of his career, he might have easily 15-20 poles more - at least I would say.

Edited by Rambazamba, 03 January 2012 - 21:33.


#16319 tyker

tyker
  • Member

  • 207 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 03 January 2012 - 21:41

and the pole/race ratio says nothing about his qualifying strength if we compare him to Senna or Vettel.
With the current qualifying rule or the old 60 minutes quali during 100% of his career, he might have easily 15-20 poles more - at least I would say.

Yes he would have had more poles, this sort of asks the question is Rosberg the best qualifier now, even better than Vettel, or has age lost Schumacher his out and out pace?

Advertisement

#16320 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 23,254 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 03 January 2012 - 21:50

The average was also correct it being 0.49s


The average is .36 approximately. Ill take the rest of your numbers as equally reliable

#16321 Rambazamba

Rambazamba
  • Member

  • 356 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 03 January 2012 - 21:53

Yes he would have had more poles, this sort of asks the question is Rosberg the best qualifier now, even better than Vettel, or has age lost Schumacher his out and out pace?


Maybe a bit of both.
I think Nico is a very strong qualifier, it´s not only his speed which is impressive and he hardly ever makes a mistake on the final lap.
This is why I think there are a few other drivers out there who would have a hard time against him too.
Nonetheless it´s a bit strange to see Michael beeing on par or only 1-2 tenth behind on several occasions and suddenly lacking 0,5-1 second behind at the next section or weekend.

Edited by Rambazamba, 03 January 2012 - 21:54.


#16322 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 03 January 2012 - 21:58

Nonetheless it´s a bit strange to see Michael beeing on par or only 1-2 tenth behind on several occasions and suddenly lacking 0,5-1 second behind at the next section or weekend.


Well it could be certain types of corner where Schumacher has lost a bit of his edge.

#16323 Rambazamba

Rambazamba
  • Member

  • 356 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 03 January 2012 - 22:03

Well it could be certain types of corner where Schumacher has lost a bit of his edge.


I though that too last year and indeed he lost most of the time at the slower sections, as Ross confirmed.
This year I couldn´t spot a certain pattern for special kind of tracks or corners tbh.


#16324 ivand911

ivand911
  • Member

  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 03 January 2012 - 22:06

Maybe a bit of both.
I think Nico is a very strong qualifier, it´s not only his speed which is impressive and he hardly ever makes a mistake on the final lap.
This is why I think there are a few other drivers out there who would have a hard time against him too.
Nonetheless it´s a bit strange to see Michael beeing on par or only 1-2 tenth behind on several occasions and suddenly lacking 0,5-1 second behind at the next section or weekend.

There was many strange things this year for MS qualifying. Very close or ahead and next big difference??
tyker can you give us now the race gaps? It is more important for me.

#16325 Kubiccia

Kubiccia
  • Member

  • 1,370 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 03 January 2012 - 22:42

In fact, Michael was never a real ball of fire at qualifying. It took him 250 GPs to top Senna's pole record of 65 poles which was done in only 161 events. As a point of reference, Vettel already has 30 poles in only 80 races.

Schumacher didn't have super qualifying cars as Senna and Vettel had/have many times. In 93, he was 8/8 against Senna in qualifyings and both had the same engine on their cars(Mclaren had a less spec model in the first races but had equal spec engines afterwards) and you can't say Benneton was really better than Mclaren. Watch Silverstone's and Spa's 93 qualifying to see the enormous gap Schumacher opened to Senna in sections where Senna had no problem as excuse.

Schumacher, in qualifyings, beaten Piquet, all his Benneton team mates, Irvine(who was thought to be a great driver while driving the Jordan), Barrichello and Massa.

Schumacher only had dominant car in 2001/2002/parts of 2003/2004/parts of 2006. Untill there he never really had car to pole but he managed to be there on pure talent. During those mentioned dominant years, Ferrari was super quick in race pace because of the nature of Bridgestone's tires, while in qualifyings, the Michelins were almost always better. That's the reason Schumi had less poles in 01/02/04 than one would expect.

Yes he would have had more poles, this sort of asks the question is Rosberg the best qualifier now, even better than Vettel, or has age lost Schumacher his out and out pace?

Rosberg is a very good qualifier but, to me, the main reason is that the 43 years old Schumi(completed today) has lost quite some raw speed.

#16326 ClockworkRacing

ClockworkRacing
  • Member

  • 316 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 03 January 2012 - 23:10

Schumacher was indeed a great qualifier back in his day,in the 1998 season,for instance,he managed to put that crap car on pole several times.In the early 2000´s he couldn´t make so many poles because of the Michelin tyres besides the fact that Williams had a special engine that BMW made only for qualifying that had plus 80 hp.

But IMO he lost around 1 sec of raw speed

#16327 spa08

spa08
  • Member

  • 615 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 03 January 2012 - 23:13

Schumacher was indeed a great qualifier back in his day,in the 1998 season,for instance,he managed to put that crap car on pole several times.In the early 2000´s he couldn´t make so many poles because of the Michelin tyres besides the fact that Williams had a special engine that BMW made only for qualifying that had plus 80 hp.

But IMO he lost around 1 sec of raw speed


I'm sure you've got plenty of evidence to prove he's lost around a second

#16328 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 2,907 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 03 January 2012 - 23:26

I don't think he's lost a second but his senses, reflexes etc have all slowed down.

It's like the boxer who was once great (think Roy Jones Jr) now can't get out of way of punches even though he knows what to do, his body can't pull the trigger any more.

Schumacher - while not completely 'shot' - simply cannot turn back the time.

#16329 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,773 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 03 January 2012 - 23:27

Actually except for Senna the rest of the multiple WDC's fit about there as well.



Uhm, Jim Clark had 33 poles out of 72 starts...

#16330 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,773 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 03 January 2012 - 23:33

For whatever reason Rosberg does a better job of bringing the finicky tires up to temperature without hurting them.


Maybe the reason is that Nico is a pretty decent driver?
'for whatever reason'.... :rolleyes:

#16331 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,773 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 03 January 2012 - 23:36

Fantasy numbers pulled out of your ass dont contribute anything to a discussion.


And you are not contributing much to the discussion with remarks like that......

#16332 tyker

tyker
  • Member

  • 207 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 04 January 2012 - 02:29

The average is .36 approximately. Ill take the rest of your numbers as equally reliable

I'm not actually guessing though

Maybe a bit of both.
I think Nico is a very strong qualifier, it´s not only his speed which is impressive and he hardly ever makes a mistake on the final lap.
This is why I think there are a few other drivers out there who would have a hard time against him too.
Nonetheless it´s a bit strange to see Michael beeing on par or only 1-2 tenth behind on several occasions and suddenly lacking 0,5-1 second behind at the next section or weekend.

I agree perhaps Rosberg is a bit underestimated by some

There was many strange things this year for MS qualifying. Very close or ahead and next big difference??
tyker can you give us now the race gaps? It is more important for me.

I don't have data for the races only an overall impression that they were generally quite even, obviously Schumacher was handicapped somewhat by his qualifying but made up for it a lot by his starts and overtakes in the races, maybe he took a few risks as he had a few comings together in the races. I feel the qualifying needs to improve next year, its so strange because thats what used to be one of his strongest points.

#16333 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 04 January 2012 - 07:56

Actually Schumacher has always been an excellent qualifier regularly beating his teammates easily


Not too hard when the team and car is concentrated around you, I was referring to against other competitors.



Uhm, Jim Clark had 33 poles out of 72 starts...


And Fango had 29 from 52 - at times they both had 100hp more and lighter cars than the rest of the field - what a surprise.

I am referring to more modern eras.

Edited by cheapracer, 04 January 2012 - 07:57.


#16334 IsometricBacon

IsometricBacon
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 04 January 2012 - 08:04

The average is .36 approximately. Ill take the rest of your numbers as equally reliable


lol obviously not as reliable as you approximation. Fact is the gap was half a second, the second largest gap on the grid. Obviously hard to accept for Schumacher fans, hence your attitude, but its very true.

#16335 Craven Morehead

Craven Morehead
  • Member

  • 4,486 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 04 January 2012 - 08:15

lol obviously not as reliable as you approximation. Fact is the gap was half a second, the second largest gap on the grid. Obviously hard to accept for Schumacher fans, hence your attitude, but its very true.


Not so. According to F1 Stats the average qualifying gap btwn Rosberg & Schumacher was 0.366 seconds. They look pretty reliable to me. Hey, they even have a race by race graph.

link here

#16336 Raelene

Raelene
  • Member

  • 5,293 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 04 January 2012 - 08:20

ouch...that will hurt - seems Badog was pretty much spot on...Isometic bacon better work on his figures again

#16337 IsometricBacon

IsometricBacon
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 04 January 2012 - 09:03

Not so. According to F1 Stats the average qualifying gap btwn Rosberg & Schumacher was 0.366 seconds. They look pretty reliable to me. Hey, they even have a race by race graph.

link here



They are wrong because their system is flawed by taking the Q3 times instead of the quickest qualifying time, which massively distorts the real picture.

At Monza it counts Rosbergs Q3 times of 1:24.477, instead of his 1:23.335 in Q2, so instead of being 4 tenths quicker than Michael he was 9 tenths slower!
Same thing at Monaco, his best qualifying lap was 1 tenth slower than Michael but his much slower Q3 time was counted as 1.1 slower than Michael.

If we adjust these numbers properly, and measure their fastest laps, (their real speed) then it goes upto around half a second.

Edited by IsometricBacon, 04 January 2012 - 09:06.


#16338 Craven Morehead

Craven Morehead
  • Member

  • 4,486 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 04 January 2012 - 09:30

So what you're saying then is that if you cherry pick lap times from three different sessions as best suits your agenda, then you end up with the result you're looking for.  ;)

As the saying goes: There are lies, damn lies, and then statistics.

#16339 IsometricBacon

IsometricBacon
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 04 January 2012 - 09:45

So what you're saying then is that if you cherry pick lap times from three different sessions as best suits your agenda, then you end up with the result you're looking for. ;)

As the saying goes: There are lies, damn lies, and then statistics.



No I am saying just pick the fastest lap time the driver was capable of in qualifying. What session it happened in is totally irrelevant for this exercise. Anything else would actually be cherry picking.

Advertisement

#16340 Raelene

Raelene
  • Member

  • 5,293 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 04 January 2012 - 09:48

and here's me thinking that qualifying was based on your fastest lap in the session you managed to get into. Silly me, we should just go back to the 12 lap qualifying (I wish we could) cause then we wouldn't have cherry pickers here.

Actually, why don't we just pick the fastest lap over the entire weekend - whether it be race, practice or qualifying.... :rolleyes:

Edited by Raelene, 04 January 2012 - 09:49.


#16341 krea

krea
  • Member

  • 710 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 04 January 2012 - 09:56

No I am saying just pick the fastest lap time the driver was capable of in qualifying. What session it happened in is totally irrelevant for this exercise. Anything else would actually be cherry picking.


but Q2 is not about the fastest lap but about the is good enough for Q3 lap.

#16342 IsometricBacon

IsometricBacon
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 04 January 2012 - 09:56

and here's me thinking that qualifying was based on your fastest lap in the session you managed to get into.


You are right it is, but this is a discussion about raw pace, not qualifying grid positions, and raw pace is judged on fastest laps and nothing else. Nobody reasonable would argue against this.

#16343 Raelene

Raelene
  • Member

  • 5,293 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 04 January 2012 - 09:58

well as I said - why don't you look at all sessions and the race - and also read what krea said

#16344 IsometricBacon

IsometricBacon
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 04 January 2012 - 09:59

but Q2 is not about the fastest lap but about the is good enough for Q3 lap.


I am not suggesting to only use q2. I am suggesting to simply use the fastest qualifying lap. Either way its not important if Michael was 0.37 or 0.47 slower, that was just a desperate attempt by a Schumacher fan to try to side step the issue at hand. Point is he was much slower than Rosberg in qualifying.

#16345 IsometricBacon

IsometricBacon
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 04 January 2012 - 10:00

well as I said - why don't you look at all sessions and the race - and also read what krea said


In qualifying both drivers are driving as fast as possible and there are no other sessions that would be faster than qualifying.

#16346 Raelene

Raelene
  • Member

  • 5,293 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 04 January 2012 - 10:00

and what do yu do if a driver doesn't set a final qualifying lap - like MS has done a couple of times.

You are cherry picking to suit your agenda..

MS fans know that NR was faster than MS in qualifying - you don't have to jack up the numbers


Edited by Raelene, 04 January 2012 - 10:02.


#16347 Paco

Paco
  • Member

  • 1,148 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 04 January 2012 - 10:07

Well.. If people must have a direct comparison between drivers. Then look at a each weekend as a whole and exclude races for both drivers where:

1. A driver had a mechanical dnf. Skews results to much in favor of other driver.
2. Exclude any races where a driver got a penalty for any reason.
3. Exclude any race where a team mate got taken out by another driver while in the lead position in the altercation even if teammate was ahead.

Basically, only look at weekends where both drivers were free and clear with no excuses or reasons for underperforming and compare there point total.

I don't know how it work out but I'd guess nico comes out ahead. Why? Simply, can drive the merc better then Michael over a 3lap stint, gets into less bumper cars and brings home the points more often. MS may be better in races and occasionally brings home higher ranking points but loses too many due to banging wheels with much lessor opponents and can't get the most out of the tires yet over 3 laps.

#16348 IsometricBacon

IsometricBacon
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 04 January 2012 - 10:15

and what do yu do if a driver doesn't set a final qualifying lap - like MS has done a couple of times.

You are cherry picking to suit your agenda..



No, you just select the fastest qualifying time. Simple, it works for every excuse you can invent to try and avoid the truth.

#16349 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,773 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 04 January 2012 - 10:24

And Fango had 29 from 52 - at times they both had 100hp more and lighter cars than the rest of the field - what a surprise.


In Clark's case are you referring to 1967 and the dfv?
Just curious cause I know you can't be talking of the period between say 1962 and 1966 cause there was no 100 hp difference then....

Edited by jj2728, 04 January 2012 - 10:25.


#16350 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,773 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 04 January 2012 - 10:28

Actually, why don't we just pick the fastest lap over the entire weekend - whether it be race, practice or qualifying.... :rolleyes:


Why? What difference is that going to make?
People are gonna cherry pick this and that ad finitum to suit their agendas....