Jump to content


Photo

Fernando Alonso thread [merged]


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

#2051 Mungo Fangio of the Year

Mungo Fangio of the Year
  • Member

  • 565 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 07 July 2010 - 21:59

I am baffled by Fernando this year.
On one side he is outperforming his team mate who survived recent coma.
But on the other side he is making so many mistakes in his fast Ferrari.

Hmm...

Time only will tell if he manages to get his motivation back on track.


Advertisement

#2052 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,205 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 07 July 2010 - 22:09

I am baffled by Fernando this year.
On one side he is outperforming his team mate who survived recent coma.
But on the other side he is making so many mistakes in his fast Ferrari.

Hmm...

Time only will tell if he manages to get his motivation back on track.


I can understand the comment regarding his mistakes, but what evidence is there that he isn't motivated?

#2053 Mungo Fangio of the Year

Mungo Fangio of the Year
  • Member

  • 565 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 07 July 2010 - 22:12

I can understand the comment regarding his mistakes, but what evidence is there that he isn't motivated?



Simply the fact that he isn't likely to win WDC this year.

#2054 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,205 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 07 July 2010 - 22:15

Simply the fact that he isn't likely to win WDC this year.


Despite the results I can't say I've noticed anything that would suggest he isn't motivated, and I very much doubt he thinks he is out of the running.

#2055 Massacrator

Massacrator
  • Member

  • 1,361 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 22:18

Simply the fact that he isn't likely to win WDC this year.

Lol

Silverstone is the half of the season, and it is just 29 points difference, it could take a little more than just a race for Alonso to pass Hamilton. Nothing is decided this soon: there are still 5 title contenders.

#2056 syph0nJZ05

syph0nJZ05
  • Member

  • 2,602 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 22:19

If Alonso had been on P2 with a decent strategy for P2 like Hamilton had in 2007 I still think the Spaniard would have won it.

That's not what I asked. I asked, if Lewis was on pole in Monaco in 2007 on the same strategy Alonso was on, then would he have been considered the favorite to win the race? The resounding answer is yes.

#2057 Campeador

Campeador
  • Member

  • 296 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 22:26

Time only will tell if he manages to get his motivation back on track.

It's hard to keep yourself motivated after an spectacle like that we saw in the European GP.

#2058 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,072 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 07 July 2010 - 22:29

That's not what I asked. I asked, if Lewis was on pole in Monaco in 2007 on the same strategy Alonso was on, then would he have been considered the favorite to win the race? The resounding answer is yes.


But what's the point of that question? Usually each year there are about 6 drivers who could win Monaco if they started from pole. The key is to actually be on pole, not to dream about what could have happened if you were.

#2059 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 7,983 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 07 July 2010 - 22:30

It's hard to keep yourself motivated after an spectacle like that we saw in the European GP.


I'm sure a double world champion is able to bounce back from one race where he was unlucky...jeez there have been races in the past where drivers have lost out due to SCs or other bad luck you know.

Advertisement

#2060 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 7,983 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 07 July 2010 - 22:32

But what's the point of that question? Usually each year there are about 6 drivers who could win Monaco if they started from pole. The key is to actually be on pole, not to dream about what could have happened if you were.


Well yep but in terms of driving performance a significantly higher fuel load is going to make that a tad difficult...the hypothetical being that hamilton may have got pole if he had the same level of fuel as alonso.

#2061 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,216 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 07 July 2010 - 23:01

I'm sure a double world champion is able to bounce back from one race where he was unlucky...jeez there have been races in the past where drivers have lost out due to SCs or other bad luck you know.

Even if Campeador doesn't understand this, Alonso surely does.

#2062 syph0nJZ05

syph0nJZ05
  • Member

  • 2,602 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2010 - 23:04

But what's the point of that question? Usually each year there are about 6 drivers who could win Monaco if they started from pole. The key is to actually be on pole, not to dream about what could have happened if you were.

You clearly haven't read the preceding pages about Monaco 2007.

#2063 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 07 July 2010 - 23:12

Well yep but in terms of driving performance a significantly higher fuel load is going to make that a tad difficult...the hypothetical being that hamilton may have got pole if he had the same level of fuel as alonso.


I think McLaren played a smart 'split' strategy at Monaco 2007.
The fact that it was Alonso was the one who got the light fuel load in Q3 should not detract from his win IMHO.

Lewis did a good job in qualifying with a heavier car.
TBH the whole debate is somewhat pointless, Monaco might have been a catalyst for what happened later in the season but was in no way the defining race.


#2064 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 7,983 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 07 July 2010 - 23:14

Even if Campeador doesn't understand this, Alonso surely does.


Oh I completely agree, the first half of my post was meant to indicate that.

It's amusing that a fan of a driver would credit him with so little character.

Unfortunately, as we've seen with lewis as well, unguarded comments in the heat of the moment will be seized on by those less than rational to feed their agendas/biases/lack of perspective.

#2065 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 7,983 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 07 July 2010 - 23:18

I think McLaren played a smart 'split' strategy at Monaco 2007.
The fact that it was Alonso was the one who got the light fuel load in Q3 should not detract from his win IMHO.

Lewis did a good job in qualifying with a heavier car.
TBH the whole debate is somewhat pointless, Monaco might have been a catalyst for what happened later in the season but was in no way the defining race.


It's an interesting one actually, in theory you want the best drivers in the same car so we can see them compete on level terms...but then the team's agenda will get in the way a times (such as splitting strategies) so you might argue that it's better to have the top contenders in equal but closely matched cars...

I'm not sure how significant hamilton's outburst was in monaco but if it led to putting him on a more equal strategy footing than previously it's a pivotal moment for him, alonso and mclaren.

#2066 Campeador

Campeador
  • Member

  • 296 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 00:01

I'm sure a double world champion is able to bounce back from one race where he was unlucky...jeez there have been races in the past where drivers have lost out due to SCs or other bad luck you know.

Bounce back? No need for that.

He's been always bouncing, and always will be.

#2067 Mungo Fangio of the Year

Mungo Fangio of the Year
  • Member

  • 565 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 00:06

Fernando and Ferrari face double problem:
First Fernando needs to stop making rooky mistakes and
second Ferrari needs to get their race strategies way better
since fast car isn't enough alone.









#2068 skid solo

skid solo
  • Member

  • 2,096 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 08 July 2010 - 01:43

trulli counting both years lost (according points) to alonso
in 2007 hamilton and alonso had the same amount of points, with alonso beating lewis 10:7 in races!


Alonso beating Lewis 10:7? Can you explain what you mean by that please?

#2069 richard01

richard01
  • Member

  • 104 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 01:53

simple, Alonso beat Lewis in 10 races and Lewis beat Alonso in 7 races which includes the race where Alonso got a grid penalty.
Lewis was more consistent bar the last two races of the season.

kind of similar to how Prost beat Senna on points one year despite Senna kicking his butt on the track.

Edited by richard01, 08 July 2010 - 01:59.


#2070 Kovalonso

Kovalonso
  • Member

  • 540 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 04:17

Obviously you are counting Monaco when McLaren instructed Lewis to hold his pace and pit in the wrong time and messed up his race.
Then in Indianapolis, Alonso made shenanigans, kind of begging Ron to help him again.

#2071 Birelman

Birelman
  • Member

  • 2,537 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 08 July 2010 - 04:47

simple, Alonso beat Lewis in 10 races and Lewis beat Alonso in 7 races which includes the race where Alonso got a grid penalty.
Lewis was more consistent bar the last two races of the season.

kind of similar to how Prost beat Senna on points one year despite Senna kicking his butt on the track.

Of course the fact that Hamilton was a rookie that year doesn't mean anything...

#2072 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 08 July 2010 - 06:23

simple, Alonso beat Lewis in 10 races and Lewis beat Alonso in 7 races which includes the race where Alonso got a grid penalty.
Lewis was more consistent bar the last two races of the season.

kind of similar to how Prost beat Senna on points one year despite Senna kicking his butt on the track.


It's a way of looking at it.

Another way would be that when Alonso beat Hamilton it was by a smaller margin than when Hamilton beat Alonso - hence why Hamilton is ahead in the final standings and considdered the winner.

#2073 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,614 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 09:13

It's a way of looking at it.

Another way would be that when Alonso beat Hamilton it was by a smaller margin than when Hamilton beat Alonso - hence why Hamilton is ahead in the final standings and considdered the winner.


Exactly, that's what happened. Another thing to look at is that Hamilton was disadvantaged by McLaren more times than Alonso was. While they finished equal on points, in my mind after 2007. I had not a single doubt that Hamilton is simply better driver than Alonso. He showed it on track and everyone with a pair of eyes could clearly see that. In 2010. he is leading 27 points over Alonso in a weaker car, that's a really great achievement.

#2074 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 8,847 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 09:35

Exactly, that's what happened. Another thing to look at is that Hamilton was disadvantaged by McLaren more times than Alonso was. While they finished equal on points, in my mind after 2007. I had not a single doubt that Hamilton is simply better driver than Alonso. He showed it on track and everyone with a pair of eyes could clearly see that. In 2010. he is leading 27 points over Alonso in a weaker car, that's a really great achievement.


The bold part makes no sense... What have you been watching? Mclaren has a better car than Ferrari for some time now. :rolleyes:

#2075 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 09:35

That's not what I asked. I asked, if Lewis was on pole in Monaco in 2007 on the same strategy Alonso was on, then would he have been considered the favorite to win the race? The resounding answer is yes.

why should the slower driver be on pole?


#2076 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 09:37

The bold part makes no sense... What have you been watching? Mclaren has a better car than Ferrari for some time now. :rolleyes:

they are the strongest team in general, look where both drivers stand in the championship and who is leading in the constructors!

#2077 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 09:39

Exactly, that's what happened. Another thing to look at is that Hamilton was disadvantaged by McLaren more times than Alonso was.

:rotfl:


While they finished equal on points, in my mind after 2007. I had not a single doubt that Hamilton is simply better driver than Alonso. He showed it on track and everyone with a pair of eyes could clearly see that.

as we mentioned 10:7 for alonso!


#2078 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 08 July 2010 - 09:42

they are the strongest team in general, look where both drivers stand in the championship and who is leading in the constructors!


So by the same Reasoning - would You agree Hamilton won the 2008 champinship in a weaker car than the Ferrari?

#2079 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 09:49

So by the same Reasoning - would You agree Hamilton won the 2008 champinship in a weaker car than the Ferrari?

absolutely!
hamilton won the title in 2008 against massa (and a very disappointing kimi) in a weaker car! (which is not just measurable by achieved points, with that you are right)

Advertisement

#2080 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,216 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 08 July 2010 - 09:54

why should the slower driver be on pole?

If he has less fuel.

#2081 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 09:59

If he has less fuel.

so it should be the teams strategy to favor the slower driver :drunk:
we saw that in 2007 (sadly) :down:

Edited by YellowHelmet, 08 July 2010 - 09:59.


#2082 Massacrator

Massacrator
  • Member

  • 1,361 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:08

If he has less fuel.

It's obvious that Hamilton had better treatment in 2007, we discussed that thousands of times. It's clear that Alonso beat Hamilton on track (10:7), that said, I don't know why Hamilton fans still want to discuss 2007.

There's nothing more to discuss, it's plain and simple: you put them to race alone 17 times on a track, Alonso wins by 3 races.

#2083 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:08

so it should be the teams strategy to favor the slower driver :drunk:
we saw that in 2007 (sadly) :down:


Did we? I can't recall seeing any signs of favouring eithr driver at McLaren in 2007. Monaco was a prime example of this, I think.

#2084 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:12

Did we? I can't recall seeing any signs of favouring eithr driver at McLaren in 2007. Monaco was a prime example of this, I think.

just take the psychological treatment into account and you will have your answer!

#2085 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 10,986 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:19

There's nothing more to discuss, it's plain and simple: you put them to race alone 17 times on a track, Alonso wins by 3 races.

There is this thing called a points system. It recognises that being beaten by a driver who is in 19th when you are in 20th is not as bad as being beaten by a driver in 1st whilst you are in 20th. It's quite clever. Maybe read about it sometime?

#2086 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:21

just take the psychological treatment into account and you will have your answer!


What psychological treatment? That season was one of the most fascinating I've seen purely because of the competition between those two drivers, and the only psychological effect Alonso could have felt was that of his team mate unexpectedly being able to challenge him straight away. We know that Alonso is the strongest driver in that area - the psychology - and he must have been a bit pissed off that he found himself in that situation. However, I don't recall the team showing any preference at any point in the season; you don't, after all, hire a double world champion to make him second best - you hire him to win.

#2087 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:23

They got the excat same points - Yes Hamilton won on countback but I have to say it impossiable to tell who was better out of Hamilton and Alonso then and right now, they are very evenly matched. If they were in a team together I think it would be VERY close!

#2088 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,072 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:29

What psychological treatment? That season was one of the most fascinating I've seen purely because of the competition between those two drivers, and the only psychological effect Alonso could have felt was that of his team mate unexpectedly being able to challenge him straight away. We know that Alonso is the strongest driver in that area - the psychology - and he must have been a bit pissed off that he found himself in that situation.


That's a perfectly valid aspect, however emphatically NOT the only one. Presenting it as the only possible reason for the fallout is frankly a bit disengenious, just like this:

However, I don't recall the team showing any preference at any point in the season.


How the team management dealt (or rather failed to deal properly) with the situation between their drivers played a key role just like Alonso loosing his cool over Hamiltons surprising performances.


#2089 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:35

That's a perfectly valid aspect, however emphatically NOT the only one. Presenting it as the only possible reason for the fallout is frankly a bit disengenious, just like this:



How the team management dealt (or rather failed to deal properly) with the situation between their drivers played a key role just like Alonso loosing his cool over Hamiltons surprising performances.


You think so? Alonso's a hot head; he was always going to lose his cool. What did you want Ron to do, cuddle him or something?

If you search for a conspiracy you'll find it, whether it's there or not. I doubt McLaren paid him the massive amount they did just to sideline him, don't you?

#2090 Massacrator

Massacrator
  • Member

  • 1,361 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:39

There is this thing called a points system. It recognises that being beaten by a driver who is in 19th when you are in 20th is not as bad as being beaten by a driver in 1st whilst you are in 20th. It's quite clever. Maybe read about it sometime?

Yes, there is a point system made up by the FIA. Why only the first ten got points and not just all the grid? why cut it at 10 and not 15? I mean: they were racing under the point of view of FIA, and the system made by FIA, and yes, Hamilton won in that system. That doesn't mean we can't put that system under our judgment and that doesn't make Hamilton faster than Alonso: Hamilton was a liiiiiiiiittle better than Alonso under that points system (obviously without taking into consideration what happened inside the team and bla bla...).

But anyway, I was talking about pure racing: let them race alone 17 times, even with a point system, Alonso would have beaten Hamilton fair and square by 10:7. And it wouldn't matter if in 100 races Hamilton finished .001 behind Alonso and in 1 race Alonso finished 100 seconds behind Hamilton (it could be a gearbox problem, accident, things involving luck, that doesn't make the driver overall worse).

(and yes, I will ignore your sarcasm attempt, please don't make that kind of attacks)

Edited by Massacrator, 08 July 2010 - 10:40.


#2091 MichaelPM

MichaelPM
  • Member

  • 2,585 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:47

Did we? I can't recall seeing any signs of favouring eithr driver at McLaren in 2007. Monaco was a prime example of this, I think.

Yea it was because McLaren wasn't favouring Hamilton in Monaco and he got beaten definitively by Alonso in position, pace and everything else which resulted in Hamilton bitching to the press and causing an FIA investigation.

After that race it was a different season and team.

Edited by MichaelPM, 08 July 2010 - 10:47.


#2092 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,205 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:47

Yes, there is a point system made up by the FIA. Why only the first ten got points and not just all the grid? why cut it at 10 and not 15? I mean: they were racing under the point of view of FIA, and the system made by FIA, and yes, Hamilton won in that system. That doesn't mean we can't put that system under our judgment and that doesn't make Hamilton faster than Alonso: Hamilton was a liiiiiiiiittle better than Alonso under that points system (obviously without taking into consideration what happened inside the team and bla bla...).

But anyway, I was talking about pure racing: let them race alone 17 times, even with a point system, Alonso would have beaten Hamilton fair and square by 10:7. And it wouldn't matter if in 100 races Hamilton finished .001 behind Alonso and in 1 race Alonso finished 100 seconds behind Hamilton (it could be a gearbox problem, accident, things involving luck, that doesn't make the driver overall worse).

(and yes, I will ignore your sarcasm attempt, please don't make that kind of attacks)


In other words when the scoring system doesn't meet your agenda you will just pluck something else out of the air upon which to judge the drivers.

#2093 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 10,986 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 08 July 2010 - 10:48

That doesn't mean we can't put that system under our judgment

But anyway, I was talking about pure racing: let them race alone 17 times, even with a point system, Alonso would have beaten Hamilton fair and square by 10:7.

Well perhaps you would like to propose your reasons why the FIA points system is inferior and simply looking at "who beat who" race to race is better?

To me, I think the points system gives a better judgement on how the drivers have done over the course of the season than "who beat who" the most times. Beating someone by a lot is worth more than beating them by a narrow margin under the points system and therefore I think it gives a more precise view. Not a perfect view, but a better one than the system you seem to like.

And on that view, Hamilton and Alonso were incredibly evenly matched in their performance in 2007 (I think the "tie breaker" is pointless in considering quality of performance, so ignore it). So in answer to your point in an earlier post: "I don't know why Hamilton fans still want to discuss 2007" - it's because I rate Alonso so highly, so (IMO, based on the points system) matching him in 2007 was (again, IMO) a fantastic achievement for Hamilton.

#2094 syph0nJZ05

syph0nJZ05
  • Member

  • 2,602 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 11:05

why should the slower driver be on pole?

OK, this has been spoon fed to you. But I will help you out again. Hamilton had more fuel in his car, 5 laps in fact. Fuel is a liquid. Liquid is heavy. When a formula one car is heavier by that weight it is slower. However, there is a way to compare the lap times of drivers by negating their respective fuel loads. This is called fuel correcting. A number of posters did this calculation for you. It showed Hamilton would have been faster than Alonso if they were on the same fuel load. This is widely regarded as showing that in fact Hamilton was faster than Alonso in Q3 in Monaco 2007. Thus your question "why should the slower driver be on pole?", is perfectly valid here. Essentially you are asking why should Alonso be on pole, if in fact he was slower than Hamilton.

#2095 syph0nJZ05

syph0nJZ05
  • Member

  • 2,602 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 11:12

Yes, there is a point system made up by the FIA. Why only the first ten got points and not just all the grid? why cut it at 10 and not 15? I mean: they were racing under the point of view of FIA, and the system made by FIA, and yes, Hamilton won in that system. That doesn't mean we can't put that system under our judgment and that doesn't make Hamilton faster than Alonso: Hamilton was a liiiiiiiiittle better than Alonso under that points system (obviously without taking into consideration what happened inside the team and bla bla...).

But anyway, I was talking about pure racing: let them race alone 17 times, even with a point system, Alonso would have beaten Hamilton fair and square by 10:7. And it wouldn't matter if in 100 races Hamilton finished .001 behind Alonso and in 1 race Alonso finished 100 seconds behind Hamilton (it could be a gearbox problem, accident, things involving luck, that doesn't make the driver overall worse).

(and yes, I will ignore your sarcasm attempt, please don't make that kind of attacks)

Well it does matter. If you like at the Tour de France or similar racing events, they use accumulative systems, where they total the time up. In 2007 the drivers raced by a race to race system, not accumulative. Thus they had in their mind the points system. So it does matter.

#2096 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,072 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 08 July 2010 - 11:15

You think so? Alonso's a hot head; he was always going to lose his cool. What did you want Ron to do, cuddle him or something?


Just putting his self-proclaimed abilities to handle latin driver to use, that would have been enough. :)

If you search for a conspiracy you'll find it, whether it's there or not. I doubt McLaren paid him the massive amount they did just to sideline him, don't you?


I don't claim that there was a full-blooded conspiracy against Alonso, things just developed as they did, all parties behaving amateurish at one point or another.

McLaren were just as surprised with Hamiltons qualities than the rest of the world. They probably wouldn't even have hired an Alonso calibre driver if they could have predicted that. When it happened, they were forced to make choices and when in doubt they chose Hamilton, somewhat understandably. I think it was never going to work between those two in the same team, any team. One HAD to leave.

#2097 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 08 July 2010 - 11:20

all parties behaving amateurish at one point or another.


That's very true.

McLaren were just as surprised with Hamiltons qualities than the rest of the world.


I never have bought this theory in any way, shape or form. If they - or the 'rest of the world' - were surprised they hadn;t been watching.



One HAD to leave.


Absolutely. A pity, as far as i'm concerned.


#2098 richard01

richard01
  • Member

  • 104 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 11:24

It's a way of looking at it.

Another way would be that when Alonso beat Hamilton it was by a smaller margin than when Hamilton beat Alonso - hence why Hamilton is ahead in the final standings and considdered the winner.

and that is why I said Lewis was more consistent. In those 7 races where Lewis beat Alonso, Alonso's results were not so good....not forgetting that in one of those races he was demoted to mid_pack on the grid.

#2099 Massacrator

Massacrator
  • Member

  • 1,361 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 11:36

Well perhaps you would like to propose your reasons why the FIA points system is inferior and simply looking at "who beat who" race to race is better?

To me, I think the points system gives a better judgement on how the drivers have done over the course of the season than "who beat who" the most times. Beating someone by a lot is worth more than beating them by a narrow margin under the points system and therefore I think it gives a more precise view. Not a perfect view, but a better one than the system you seem to like.

And on that view, Hamilton and Alonso were incredibly evenly matched in their performance in 2007 (I think the "tie breaker" is pointless in considering quality of performance, so ignore it). So in answer to your point in an earlier post: "I don't know why Hamilton fans still want to discuss 2007" - it's because I rate Alonso so highly, so (IMO, based on the points system) matching him in 2007 was (again, IMO) a fantastic achievement for Hamilton.

Well, to me it is pretty obvious:

Let me set this example for you:

Fake F1:
10 races,
10 drivers

There's the DRIVER A who finishes 5th in every GP
Then there's DRIVER B who finishes 10th in 9 GP and 1st in 1 GP.

DRIVER A was 4 positions ahead of DRIVER B in 9 GPS, that means a total of 36 positions
DRIVER B was in 1 GP 9 positions ahead of DRIVER A, that means a total of 9 positions.

Seems obvious who the best driver is, right? Let's check their last score with FIA's kind of point system:

Point system: 6, 4, 2, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

DRIVER A: 0 points
DRIVER B: 10 points

Oh, yes, DRIVER B finished in all the races out of points (in FIA's game), but now you tell me this isn't unfair? :rolleyes:

Advertisement

#2100 richard01

richard01
  • Member

  • 104 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 11:48

fia point system is not the only indicator of performance I am sorry _ leave that for the teenagers who are lazy. We are all adults with critical minds who can do a deep down analysis and come up with our own conclusions. If lewis has a mech failure from the lead in silverstone this weekend and button finishes the race 3rd, lewis would be behind button on points after the race. Does this mean that up until that point button has been the better driver?
I don't think so.