Jump to content


Photo

Fernando Alonso thread [merged]


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
14493 replies to this topic

#1951 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 11:35

Ron Dennis: "Alonso didn’t expect Hamilton to be that competitive in his first year. He told me at the beginning that it was my decision to sign a rookie like Hamilton, but that it could cost me the constructors’ championship. Fernando was calculating everything, but not that Lewis would challenge him. That affected him massively."

http://www.formula1....10/7/10988.html


That sounds like a prophecy right now :rotfl:

Edited by fabr68, 07 July 2010 - 11:35.


Advertisement

#1952 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 11:46

What other stats do you want? You give no credit because you do not like the conclusion, but the figures are good. They are accurate and, unless you can provide alternatives which are at least as well researched you should at least give them some respect.

You don't agree with the conclusion - fine and you should argue that point if you wish - but when you just display a complete lack of respect for the effort gone into it just looks like you are, well, trolling.

Can you agree that the stats are good but that you might have a subjectively different view of the outcome? Can you come up with different stats which support your view? Or are we wasting our time even engaging with you on this?

are you talking for a collective (or why else do you use we)?

there is a guy who posted another calculation in this thread, which says that even fuel corrected (nothing really worth looking, especially in monaco) alonso was ON THAT ONE LAP faster.
but as i said, alonso was on all three days fastest, drove faster in race, and deserved the win.

any suggestions that alonso just won because he was lighter is unfair, coz in other days and sessions he was faster too! (and the better strategy was always given to the faster guy in mclaren 2007, as alonso was faster he got the better strategy, if we are saying that there is a zero sum game regarding the strategies!)
So dont try to belittle alonsos achievement in monaco 2007 (that is trolling!)!

Edited by YellowHelmet, 07 July 2010 - 11:54.


#1953 MichaelPM

MichaelPM
  • Member

  • 2,587 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 July 2010 - 11:55

http://mclaren.com/home

Check out the Silverstone training video. Lewis looks to be irritated by losing to Button, holding up his car and not shaking hands initially.
I bet this is what annoyed Alonso when he beat him fairly and Hamilton turned into a petulant child like that. :down:

I know i'd have trouble working professionally with someone with that kind of attitude.

Edited by MichaelPM, 07 July 2010 - 11:56.


#1954 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 07 July 2010 - 11:57

there is a guy who posted another calculation in this thread, which says that even fuel corrected (nothing really worth looking, especially in monaco) alonso was ON THAT ONE LAP faster.

I guess you mean this post: http://forums.autosp...a...t&p=4428570 ?

It contains 2 errors, I believe:

1. It states 1 lap of fuel at Monaco is worth 0.025s - this is incorrect, it is 1kg of fuel is worth 0.025s.

2. It credits Hamilton with only 2 laps of fuel more than Alonso in qualifying (based on what happened in the race), whereas from the FIA report we know that it was 5 laps of fuel in qualy.

So dont try to belittle alonsos achievement in monaco 2007 (that is trolling!)!

:yawnface:

None of the above is to suggest that Alonso did not deserve that win.



#1955 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,211 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:01

http://mclaren.com/home

Check out the Silverstone training video. Lewis looks to be irritated by losing to Button, holding up his car and not shaking hands initially.
I bet this is what annoyed Alonso when he beat him fairly and Hamilton turned into a petulant child like that. :down:

I know i'd have trouble working professionally with someone with that kind of attitude.


Seriously is that what you actually see in that video? What I see is 2 drivers having a laugh and taking the mickey with each other. It does seem that no matter what some do someone will try and fidn something negative about it, and when all else fails twist the event to suit.

#1956 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:07

I guess you mean this post: http://forums.autosp...a...t&p=4428570 ?

It contains 2 errors, I believe:

1. It states 1 lap of fuel at Monaco is worth 0.025s - this is incorrect, it is 1kg of fuel is worth 0.025s.

2. It credits Hamilton with only 2 laps of fuel more than Alonso in qualifying (based on what happened in the race), whereas from the FIA report we know that it was 5 laps of fuel in qualy.

i am not sure why do you want to discuss those uncertain fuel load informations?
is that any "curcial" statistics!

how much fuel had lewis with him? can you give me that stat

P.S.: i am not sure if that was that guy!



#1957 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:11

i am not sure why do you want to discuss those uncertain fuel load informations?
is that any "curcial" statistics!

how much fuel had lewis with him? can you give me that stat

P.S.: i am not sure if that was that guy!


5 laps more fuel as confirmed by the FIA. http://www.fia.com/m.../300507-01.html


#1958 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:13

5 laps more fuel as confirmed by the FIA. http://www.fia.com/m.../300507-01.html

i am not asking that, i am asking about his fuel load in kg!



#1959 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:16

i am not asking that, i am asking about his fuel load in kg!


Well The FIA CONFIRMED it is 5 more - so what difference does it make how much they had?

Advertisement

#1960 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:17

http://mclaren.com/home

Check out the Silverstone training video. Lewis looks to be irritated by losing to Button, holding up his car and not shaking hands initially.
I bet this is what annoyed Alonso when he beat him fairly and Hamilton turned into a petulant child like that. :down:

I know i'd have trouble working professionally with someone with that kind of attitude.


HAHAHAHAHA

#1961 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:17

i am not sure why do you want to discuss those uncertain fuel load informations?
is that any "curcial" statistics!

how much fuel had lewis with him? can you give me that stat

The fuel load information comes from the FIA. In 07 the FIA knew the amount of fuel in each car in Q3. I think the 5 laps of extra fuel stat is therefore pretty certain.

The other two have some element of uncertainty. The fuel used per lap comes from Williams and is for 09. I doubt that, especially with engine homologation, that it would be much different from McLaren in 07. The time cost per kilo is an ITV estimate also for 09 - I don't know what source they had to base that on, but think it's reasonable to assume it would be reliable and, again, I don't see a reason for there to be a vast difference between 07 and 09.

I would also note that the figure from the calculations based on the above is 1.65x the amount Hamilton needed to be on pole. So the "uncertain" figures would need to be more than 40% out for the conclusion to be incorrect. I think the assumptions are safe enough within a 40% error margin.

P.S.: i am not sure if that was that guy!

If you are going to criticise the calculation I produced, and fully sourced, on the basis of someone having done a different one, you might have the decency to have checked that other calculation ...

#1962 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:19

Well The FIA CONFIRMED it is 5 more - so what difference does it make how much they had?

it allows us to calculate!

#1963 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:21

i am not asking that, i am asking about his fuel load in kg!

Multiply the Williams data on kg of fuel used per lap around Monaco (2.58kg) by 5 to get your figure (12.9kg difference). I linked to all this in my original post and set it out quite clearly.

#1964 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:22

I think the assumptions are safe enough within a 40% error margin.

1. and again, if this stats are so unreliable why do we use them here!
2. are those stats crucial (and if yes, to say what?)

#1965 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:23

it allows us to calculate!


It's about 13KG more which is about 0.32 time difference..



#1966 wj_gibson

wj_gibson
  • Member

  • 2,074 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:24

You lot do realise that the 2007 Monaco Grand Prix happened over three years ago?

#1967 syph0nJZ05

syph0nJZ05
  • Member

  • 2,602 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:31

http://mclaren.com/home

Check out the Silverstone training video. Lewis looks to be irritated by losing to Button, holding up his car and not shaking hands initially.
I bet this is what annoyed Alonso when he beat him fairly and Hamilton turned into a petulant child like that. :down:

I know i'd have trouble working professionally with someone with that kind of attitude.

Just lol at your summation. Can I ask, did you watch that video with the intention of bashing Lewis? Because all I saw when I watched it was two current team-mates joking about playing with a scaletrix set. And by the way, why did you post it in the Alonso thread, really relevant isn't it :rolleyes: ?

#1968 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:33

1. and again, if this stats are so unreliable why do we use them here!

I am not saying they are unreliable. I am pointing out that even if they are a little unreliable it makes no difference to the conclusion, they would have to be very unreliable for that to happen.

As examples, on the basis of a 0.180 difference being needed:

1. Assuming the time cost per kilo of 0.023s is spot on - there would have to be 7.826kg of fuel extra in Hamilton's car. Dividing that by the 5 laps we knew he had gives 1.56kg per lap. The Williams figure for 09 is 2.58kg per lap. Do you really think that the 09 Williams took 2.58kg of fuel to lap around Monaco whereas the 07 McLaren only took 1.55kg?

2. Assuming the kg per lap is spot on, we get a 12.9kg difference. With 0.180 needed that would mean a minimum of 0.014s per lap. The ITV estimate was 0.023s. Do you think their estimate (I assume based on discussions with team insiders) was nearly double the reality?

2. are those stats crucial (and if yes, to say what?)

What do you mean by crucial?

I have only presented them because abc was derided for his statement that, on the same strategy, Hamilton could have beaten Alonso. Given the statistics I've presented, I don't think that's an unreasonable conclusion to come to.

#1969 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,211 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:35

Just lol at your summation. Can I ask, did you watch that video with the intention of bashing Lewis? Because all I saw when I watched it was two current team-mates joking about playing with a scaletrix set. And by the way, why did you post it in the Alonso thread, really relevant isn't it :rolleyes: ?


Probably thought there was more chance of finding some like minded bashers here.

#1970 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:37

Multiply the Williams data on kg of fuel used per lap around Monaco (2.58kg) by 5 to get your figure (12.9kg difference). I linked to all this in my original post and set it out quite clearly.

no i mean how much in total.

after that source 2.58 x 31 = 79.98 (~80)

1kg/lap costs about 0.023 (itv)


70x 0.023= 1,61s (time difference to car with just fuel for 4 laps)

that means if we take hamiltons 1.15.905 - 1,61 --> ideal time 1.14.3
the fastest lap of qualy was 1.15.431 set by alonso with low fuel, we dont know how much exactly but it was very low!
whether 1kg/lap is to high or there are other explanations why no driver couldnt even achieve a time near or under 1.15!

#1971 bonjon1979

bonjon1979
  • Member

  • 1,117 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:38

http://mclaren.com/home

Check out the Silverstone training video. Lewis looks to be irritated by losing to Button, holding up his car and not shaking hands initially.
I bet this is what annoyed Alonso when he beat him fairly and Hamilton turned into a petulant child like that. :down:

I know i'd have trouble working professionally with someone with that kind of attitude.


This is a joke, right?

#1972 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:38

I have only presented them because abc was derided for his statement that, on the same strategy, Hamilton could have beaten Alonso. Given the statistics I've presented, I don't think that's an unreasonable conclusion to come to.

so your whole explanation is just based on 1 lap :confused:
why dont look at whole weekend where hamilton was always (a little bit) slower!

#1973 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,615 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:41

http://mclaren.com/home

Check out the Silverstone training video. Lewis looks to be irritated by losing to Button, holding up his car and not shaking hands initially.
I bet this is what annoyed Alonso when he beat him fairly and Hamilton turned into a petulant child like that. :down:

I know i'd have trouble working professionally with someone with that kind of attitude.


Well, then you probably have an attitude problem yourself.

Those Lewis / Jense videos always look a bit too friendly (not to use the word 'artificial') to me. This one included.

#1974 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:42

so your whole explanation is just based on 1 lap :confused:
why dont look at whole weekend where hamilton was always (a little bit) slower!

The qualification lap in Moncao is pretty crucial. Passing is quite tough there, I've heard.

#1975 bonjon1979

bonjon1979
  • Member

  • 1,117 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:42

so your whole explanation is just based on 1 lap :confused:
why dont look at whole weekend where hamilton was always (a little bit) slower!


I think he's making the point that if hamilton was on the same strategy as Alonso he would've been on pole and as anyone who has watched F1 it is very difficult to overtake the man in front.

#1976 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:45

I think he's making the point that if hamilton was on the same strategy as Alonso he would've been on pole and as anyone who has watched F1 it is very difficult to overtake the man in front.

but it is impossible to judge just on ONE LAP, why dont we take q2 into account, both on same fuel load, alonso faster!
and as i said the 0.023s/kg are to much especially in monaco!

#1977 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,615 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:45

Almost as funny as the one about hamilton being held back from beating Alonso at monaco 07 by his own team.


Why is that funny? Not claiming he would beat him, but they were thereabouts in terms of fuel-corrected speed - it could have happened.

#1978 syph0nJZ05

syph0nJZ05
  • Member

  • 2,602 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:45

This is a joke, right?

Sadly I think not :stoned: .

#1979 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:46

The qualification lap in Moncao is pretty crucial. Passing is quite tough there, I've heard.

so the faster guy (as proven on friday and in saturday till q3) got the better strategy!

Advertisement

#1980 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:46

Why is that funny? Not claiming he would beat him, but they were thereabouts in terms of fuel-corrected speed - it could have happened.

no if we take other fp or q2 into account!

#1981 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:49

but it is impossible to judge just on ONE LAP, why dont we take q2 into account, both on same fuel load, alonso faster!
and as i said the 0.023s/kg are to much especially in monaco!


thats from williams in 2009 - it's probably more in 2007 as the 18-000 rev limit wasnt there and the cars were pushinf 21-000 revs!

#1982 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:50

no i mean how much in total.

after that source 2.58 x 31 = 79.98 (~80)

1kg/lap costs about 0.023 (itv)


70x 0.023= 1,61s (time difference to car with just fuel for 4 laps)

that means if we take hamiltons 1.15.905 - 1,61 --> ideal time 1.14.3
the fastest lap of qualy was 1.15.431 set by alonso with low fuel, we dont know how much exactly but it was very low!
whether 1kg/lap is to high or there are other explanations why no driver couldnt even achieve a time near or under 1.15!


Where do you get thr 70 from?????

#1983 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,615 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:50

any suggestions that alonso just won because he was lighter is unfair, coz in other days and sessions he was faster too! (and the better strategy was always given to the faster guy in mclaren 2007, as alonso was faster he got the better strategy, if we are saying that there is a zero sum game regarding the strategies!)
So dont try to belittle alonsos achievement in monaco 2007 (that is trolling!)!


Do you have any sources for bolded part?

All I've heard is that better strategy was switched from race to race (I think that Alonso also said that, not just McLaren guys). I just am not 100% sure if it started after Monaco or straight away into season.

Edited by velgajski1, 07 July 2010 - 12:51.


#1984 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:51

thats from williams in 2009 - it's probably more in 2007 as the 18-000 rev limit wasnt there and the cars were pushinf 21-000 revs!

21000 revs in 2007 :confused:

and isnt there a difference between teams on that stat? (regarding the engine they use and how they car react about having more fuel!)

#1985 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:51

Do you have any sources for bolded part?

All I've heard is that better strategy was switched from race to race. I just am not 100% sure if it started after Monaco or straight away into season.

dennis said the faster guy in q2 gets better strategy!

#1986 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:53

Where do you get thr 70 from?????

80kg lewis had

70 kg = (80 kg lewis had - 10 kg lewis need (for 4 laps) in monaco setting an ideal --> fuel corrected time!)

#1987 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:53

but it is impossible to judge just on ONE LAP, why dont we take q2 into account, both on same fuel load, alonso faster!

Because it is Q3 that determines grid position. It's all ifs and buts anyway. No one is presenting anything as definitive except for you. I am saying there was a possibility, had they been on the same strategy, that Hamilton would have won. Note: possibility. No one knows anything for sure because it didn't happen like that. But the numbers from Q3 suggest it was a possibility.

so the faster guy (as proven on friday and in saturday till q3) got the better strategy!

From my very first post on this subject:

None of the above is to suggest that Alonso did not deserve that win. The split strategy was very sensible for the team



#1988 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,615 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:54

no if we take other fp or q2 into account!


Point is - he wasn't able to race Alonso due to strategy change, and he obviously didn't like that. And you can't blame him for that because in that short time he gained massive support because most people have seen that he is a better driver then Alonso.

#1989 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,615 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:57

dennis said the faster guy in q2 gets better strategy!


Any sources for that? I know that Hungary incident was triggered because Hamilton took advantage that was supposed to belong to Alonso, and everyone there when explaining the incident claimed that this is switched from race to race.

#1990 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:57

Because it is Q3 that determines grid position. It's all ifs and buts anyway. No one is presenting anything as definitive except for you. I am saying there was a possibility, had they been on the same strategy, that Hamilton would have won. Note: possibility. No one knows anything for sure because it didn't happen like that. But the numbers from Q3 suggest it was a possibility.

I am with you, if alonso was slower on that weekend in monaco 2007, hamilton would have had a possibility to win!
But as Alonso was faster, there was no way hamilton could have won!

Edited by YellowHelmet, 07 July 2010 - 12:59.


#1991 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 12:57

Any sources for that? I know that Hungary incident was triggered because Hamilton took advantage that was supposed to belong to Alonso, and everyone there when explaining the incident claimed that this is switched from race to race.

i will try to find one, but it was decided after q2, no switch!

#1992 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,252 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 07 July 2010 - 13:01

I am with you, if alonso was slower on that weekend in monaco 2007, hamilton would have had a possibility to win!
But as Alonso was faster, there was no way hamilton could have won!

You are deliberately misrepresenting his post.

#1993 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 07 July 2010 - 13:01

I am with you, if alonso was slower on that weekend in monaco 2007, hamilton would have had a possibility to win!
But as Alonso was faster, there was no way hamilton could have won!

No you are not with me as I am saying that if they had the same amount of fuel in Q3 Hamilton would have had a possibility to win. So there was a way he could have won, other than Alonso being slower.

I have no idea how I can spell this out any clearer to you. I am unsure whether you have deliberately misrepresented what I am saying (in which case, it is very poor form) or are incapable of understanding the points I am making (in which case, as they are being spoon fed, ...).

#1994 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 07 July 2010 - 13:04

dennis said the faster guy in q2 gets better strategy!

I'm not sure how it worked up to Monaco, but (iirc) from then onwards they both had exactly the same fuel for Q3 regardless of whoever was faster in Q2.

Ferrari ran a system of "fastest in Q2 = first choice of fuel load for Q3" system between Massa and Kimi - at least in 08. You could tell as whoever was quicker in Q2 was lighter in Q3.

#1995 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 13:06

No you are not with me as I am saying that if they had the same amount of fuel in Q3 Hamilton would have had a possibility to win. So there was a way he could have won, other than Alonso being slower.

I have no idea how I can spell this out any clearer to you. I am unsure whether you have deliberately misrepresented what I am saying (in which case, it is very poor form) or are incapable of understanding the points I am making (in which case, as they are being spoon fed, ...).

hey everything is cool!
the thing is, hamilton was very fast at that weekend, but he was slightly, just slightly slower than alonso.
nothing bad about that!
i find it ridiculous (nothing against you, i mean for others who have published that!) to come up with an irrelevant q3 fuel corrected time-stat to say that lewis would have had a possibility to win if he was on same strategy as alonso was!
look at the whole weekend and you will see, lewis was just slightly slower!

#1996 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 07 July 2010 - 13:09

say that lewis would have had a possibility to win if he was on same strategy as alonso was!


Can you prove he wouldn't have had a possibility to win, then?

#1997 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 13:09

I'm not sure how it worked up to Monaco, but (iirc) from then onwards they both had exactly the same fuel for Q3 regardless of whoever was faster in Q2.

i have something different in mind! (i hope i can find those articles, if you are faster, even better!)




#1998 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 13:11

Can you prove he wouldn't have had a possibility to win, then?

i am just judging on the speed both showed the whole weekend (friday, saturday, sunday)! especially also on the long runs!

#1999 Jay101

Jay101
  • Member

  • 614 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 07 July 2010 - 13:21

i am just judging on the speed both showed the whole weekend (friday, saturday, sunday)! especially also on the long runs!

FP times are not and never will be proof of anything since the drivers have different programs and setups to work with.

Q1 LH was nearly 0.4 seconds quicker than FA

Q2 (which has about as much meaning as Q1) FA was just 0.048 seconds quicker than LH not even a tenth.

So I can't agree with you that FA was quicker over the weekend particularly when Q3 fuel corrected shows LH faster and so do the Q1 and Q2 over all times shows LH as being faster if they show anything at all.

Advertisement

#2000 Number62

Number62
  • Member

  • 493 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 07 July 2010 - 13:22

i find it ridiculous (nothing against you, i mean for others who have published that!) to come up with an irrelevant q3 fuel corrected time-stat to say that lewis would have had a possibility to win if he was on same strategy as alonso was!


It doesn't warrant ridicule to claim that there was a 'possibility' for Hamilton to win on a different strategy. Especially with some evidential information.

You can no more prove it impossible than others can claim it a certainty.