Jump to content


Photo

Lewis and Jenson scorecard 2011 (merged)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
24328 replies to this topic

#3801 Rocket73

Rocket73
  • Member

  • 1,460 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 26 April 2011 - 15:14

Rocket73

Do you know which McLaren driver retired more due to reliability problems in 1988?


Where exactly did i say Ayrton was hard on his car? And even so the point is, and i don't believe anyone can deny this, drivers who are harder on their car will have more failures.

While JB and LH have had the same equipment this clearly is evident.

Advertisement

#3802 smitten

smitten
  • Member

  • 1,409 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 26 April 2011 - 15:35

And even so the point is, and i don't believe anyone can deny this, drivers who are harder on their car will have more failures.


It certainly is a truism, but I question your analysis of what constitutes a driver induced failure versus a manufacturing or assembly issue.

Furthermore, at what point does it become statistically significant? The McLaren reliability was excellent last year, compared to Ferrari or RBR who both cooked a few engines (presumably a driver error in your mind), so it is likely that failure-rates would seem to affect one driver much more than another. The statistical probability of ten coin tosses in a row coming up heads may be low; but it is possible and does not mean that the coin is weighted or that the wrong driver was tossing it.

#3803 ArtShelley

ArtShelley
  • Member

  • 3,560 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 26 April 2011 - 15:35

Yeah Alain Prost had a real problem with his philosophy didn't he? Triple world champion - what a failure and this guy was seriously admired for his style.

And what's more, he would have beaten Senna and made it 4 WDC's if Ayrton hadn't cheated and crashed into him.


You sir need to revisit your knowledge of history a little better. The Senna documentary is a good one. Before Senna crashed into Prost, what about the previous example the other way around?

#3804 jjcale

jjcale
  • Member

  • 7,274 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 26 April 2011 - 15:43

You sir need to revisit your knowledge of history a little better. The Senna documentary is a good one. Before Senna crashed into Prost, what about the previous example the other way around?


And Prost won 4 titles... not 3

#3805 hotstickyslick

hotstickyslick
  • Member

  • 3,385 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 26 April 2011 - 16:30

Where exactly did i say Ayrton was hard on his car?

When did I excuse you of such?

And even so the point is, and i don't believe anyone can deny this, drivers who are harder on their car will have more failures.

To answer the question for you (as you seem to be avoiding it for whatever reason), Prost had more car failures than Senna did in 1988. Kind of goes against your logic doesn't it?

While JB and LH have had the same equipment this clearly is evident.

Why continue to dig yourself a hole that you know you won't be able to climb out of?

It certainly is a truism, but I question your analysis of what constitutes a driver induced failure versus a manufacturing or assembly issue.

Furthermore, at what point does it become statistically significant? The McLaren reliability was excellent last year, compared to Ferrari or RBR who both cooked a few engines (presumably a driver error in your mind), so it is likely that failure-rates would seem to affect one driver much more than another. The statistical probability of ten coin tosses in a row coming up heads may be low; but it is possible and does not mean that the coin is weighted or that the wrong driver was tossing it.

Ferrari proved to have the most reliable car last year actually.

Edited by hotstickyslick, 26 April 2011 - 16:31.


#3806 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 8,141 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 26 April 2011 - 16:45

Come on man - jenson spent most of his his career in a dodgy honda which either fell apart on it's own or because it had to be driven so hard to get any pace out of it.

While they have been at the same team with the same equipment the difference has been massive. but you can carry on ignoring it if you like :up:


Oh, I see. You have an ability to tell when a car 'falls apart on it's own' and otherwise when it is all the fault of the driver.....

A 'massive difference' you say.... 2-1 failed to finish due to reliabillity issues. Not particularly massive is it.

It still doesn't hide the fact that Hamilton has retired due to unreliability in only three races to date, which doesn't quite fit with your 'drives the car too hard' claim.

#3807 PARAZAR

PARAZAR
  • Member

  • 1,093 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 26 April 2011 - 17:14

Leave the guy alone. He's allowed to express his opinion. I doubt he's the one ruining this thread, this thread is already ridiculous! If we can put up with all the McLaren vs Lewis conspiracy theories then we can certainly put up with someone's opinion on an overtaking manoeuvre.

#3808 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,017 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 26 April 2011 - 17:21

Where exactly did i say Ayrton was hard on his car? And even so the point is, and i don't believe anyone can deny this, drivers who are harder on their car will have more failures.

While JB and LH have had the same equipment this clearly is evident.


So following your logic you must believe that prost was harder on his car than senna...interesting.

Altenratively of course you're simply selecting evidence to suit your agenda which is then blowing up in your face...

#3809 AMG FAN

AMG FAN
  • Member

  • 890 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 26 April 2011 - 18:27

my question is,how can a driver who is so aggressive to the state that he breaks rims and gearbox manage to finish the 2008 season as WDC? and how come this aggressive guy has always finished in the top 5? surely it doesn't add up now does it?
the simple truth is that if some of you trolls decided to stick with reality,there would be enough faults to pick on Lewis about instead of making stuff up to suit your agenda only to end up making yourselves look really stupid.

#3810 pinkypants

pinkypants
  • Member

  • 1,413 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 26 April 2011 - 18:39

Leave the guy alone. He's allowed to express his opinion. I doubt he's the one ruining this thread, this thread is already ridiculous! If we can put up with all the McLaren vs Lewis conspiracy theories then we can certainly put up with someone's opinion on an overtaking manoeuvre.


When it's not based in reality and the evidence provided for this opinion is actually incorrect, then people have every right to counter his arguments. He chooses to come back here and post his opinions, I'm sure he / she is able to cope with an attempt at constructive discussion here. I'm yet to understand what this has got to do with Lewis v. Jenson in 2011, especially considering there haven't been any car failures as yet. I'm sure it will be made relevant at some point!

#3811 jonnoj

jonnoj
  • Member

  • 1,114 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 26 April 2011 - 19:18

Come on man - jenson spent most of his his career in a dodgy honda which either fell apart on it's own or because it had to be driven so hard to get any pace out of it.



Button chose to drive for Honda. It cost Honda a lot of money to keep him too.



#3812 PARAZAR

PARAZAR
  • Member

  • 1,093 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 26 April 2011 - 19:35

When it's not based in reality and the evidence provided for this opinion is actually incorrect, then people have every right to counter his arguments. He chooses to come back here and post his opinions, I'm sure he / she is able to cope with an attempt at constructive discussion here. I'm yet to understand what this has got to do with Lewis v. Jenson in 2011, especially considering there haven't been any car failures as yet. I'm sure it will be made relevant at some point!


Yes I see your point but still, it's one thing to be constructive and it's another thing to be belittling. Yes there haven't been any car failures as yet and hopefully there will be none (overly hopeful I know). As far as what Rocket is saying about Hamilton's overtaking move on Button I do see where he's coming from. It could have ended differently if Button hadn't given space to Lewis. Could have ended like a couple of Prost/Senna debacles. Stressing on the "could have" and that's not taking anything from Hamilton's move on Button. As far as the other point I don't know exactly how much a driving style affects the car, but someone that is more aggressive say going over the kerbs probably has more chance of damaging the floor. What is your opinion on this?

#3813 AMG FAN

AMG FAN
  • Member

  • 890 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 26 April 2011 - 19:51

Yes I see your point but still, it's one thing to be constructive and it's another thing to be belittling. Yes there haven't been any car failures as yet and hopefully there will be none (overly hopeful I know). As far as what Rocket is saying about Hamilton's overtaking move on Button I do see where he's coming from. It could have ended differently if Button hadn't given space to Lewis. Could have ended like a couple of Prost/Senna debacles. Stressing on the "could have" and that's not taking anything from Hamilton's move on Button. As far as the other point I don't know exactly how much a driving style affects the car, but someone that is more aggressive say going over the kerbs probably has more chance of damaging the floor. What is your opinion on this?

yes but when we judge how many races that Lewis has had compared to his DNF then it's fair to say that his driving style doesn't do harm to the car....he has started 74 races and dnfd 4 of those,pretty good stats and doesn't make sense when some claim his driving style hurts the car,it used to be that his style hurt the tyre but people have seen that has been debunked countless times and now it's on to the next excuse.

#3814 PARAZAR

PARAZAR
  • Member

  • 1,093 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 26 April 2011 - 20:21

yes but when we judge how many races that Lewis has had compared to his DNF then it's fair to say that his driving style doesn't do harm to the car....he has started 74 races and dnfd 4 of those,pretty good stats and doesn't make sense when some claim his driving style hurts the car,it used to be that his style hurt the tyre but people have seen that has been debunked countless times and now it's on to the next excuse.


I wasn't implying that Lewis hurts his car, it was a question. No one can deny that Hamilton has natural talent and is a great driver and will only get better and this is coming from a Button fan. So I rewatched the overtaking move and Button had begun taking the racing line but he was too slow and Lewis was pretty determined to make that move stick. There was no way Button could have prevented the overtake, Lewis was too fast and had Button shut the door on him they would have definately collided.

Edited by PARAZAR, 26 April 2011 - 20:23.


#3815 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,411 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 26 April 2011 - 23:03

Please keep to the topic. If you must mention incidents like Singapore '08, then please do so within the context of the thread topic. If you wish to discuss that particular event in detail, there are threads dedicated to that which you can check through to see if your opinion is original and, if so, append something new.

Same goes for 2007. Not here, thank you.

#3816 Con1

Con1
  • Member

  • 244 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 26 April 2011 - 23:21

How often in F1 do you see overtaking where there is zero risk of a collision?

Virtually every overtake (and I mean "overtake" and not "pass") involves relying on the other driver not to run in to you. If they shut the door then there will be a collision.

So Jenson didn't turn in on Lewis. So what? Massa didn't turn in either. Nor did Vettel. Lewis didn't turn in on Vettel when he passed earlier in the race.

Brundle talks about Senna putting you in a position where you had to decide if you crashed. He would put his car on the inside of the corner. It was then your decision; did you hit him or get out of the way. This was NOT one of those moves. It was a good overtake.

Lewis pulled a great move on Jenson. Simple as. Get over it and move on.

Best driver of the two in China? Lewis. Best driver of the two in Malaysia? Jenson. That's the facts. I don't get the aggro that has developed in this thread.

And to repeat the point made elsewhere...this is the 2011 thread. It is not about who broke what cars in previous seasons. If you seriously want to make it about that then Lewis wins hands down. Less DNFs, more points, podiums, wins and poles. So I suggest we move on and stick with 2011 where there is some (hopefully friendly) debate to be had.

#3817 Rocket73

Rocket73
  • Member

  • 1,460 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 06:33

Leave the guy alone. He's allowed to express his opinion. I doubt he's the one ruining this thread, this thread is already ridiculous! If we can put up with all the McLaren vs Lewis conspiracy theories then we can certainly put up with someone's opinion on an overtaking manoeuvre.


Cheers bud :up:

Look the point i keep trying to make is the turtle and the hare theory. Lewis drives hard and fast and jenson smooth and steady. In general. Harder drivers TEND to have more failures.

So i think that it is fair to argue that if a driver has a mechanical failure ultimately we can't say it wasn't in some way his fault. Obviously some cars are just badly engineered or whatever like the Honda. SO for the sake of the Jenson v Lewis comparison we can only really use their time at mclaren as a reference. Jenson spent way too long in crappy cars and Lewis has never driven anything other than a Mclaren.

All the mistakes Lewis has made including those from last year compared with jenson just backs up this theory. Vettel into JB at SPA was in no way Jenson's fault hence my claim Lewis was lucky to win by any sort of margin last year.

A lot of people on here just can't handle it if anything is said on here that excludes Lewis being some sort of god. Well sorry guys but he has major shortcomings and as far as i can see it is pretty much level pegging between him and jb so far at macca and it's a counrty mile from the endless claims pre 2010 that lewis was going to wipe the floor with JB.

It should also be remembered that JB has had to come into a team built around Lewis who has been with mclaren for over a decade.

#3818 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 27 April 2011 - 08:13

So i think that it is fair to argue that if a driver has a mechanical failure ultimately we can't say it wasn't in some way his fault.

Well, that statement is a long way from what kicked all this off, which was that those failures were partly his fault. Being unable to rule out 100% blame is not the same as ascribing some blame. So at least you seem to be coming round to a more reasonable view now. Perhaps if you had presented things in this fashion earlier there would have been less of an issue?

So for the sake of the Jenson v Lewis comparison we can only really use their time at mclaren as a reference. Jenson spent way too long in crappy cars and Lewis has never driven anything other than a Mclaren.

All the mistakes Lewis has made including those from last year compared with jenson just backs up this theory.

And in their time together at McLaren it is 2 race ending mechanical failures vs 1. Over a sample set of about 20 races. Neither the difference in failures nor the sample set seems sufficiently large to me to draw the conclusion that Hamilton is harder on his car and this leads to race ending failures.

Vettel into JB at SPA was in no way Jenson's fault hence my claim Lewis was lucky to win by any sort of margin last year.

I agree that Lewis had more race ending driver errors than Jenson last year.

I'd also suggest that Spain, Hungary and Japan (second failure) were extremely likely* not Hamilton's fault. And that the likely points loss from these incidents outweigh Jenson's points loss from his 'no fault' incidents at Monaco and Spa. In which case Jenson was lucky to not have been beaten by a slightly larger margin last year.

(*see, I agree with you that 'ultimately we can't say [definitively] it wasn't in some way his fault', but I think the balance of the evidence we have makes a claim of 'extremely likely' a perfectly fair one)

A lot of people on here just can't handle it if anything is said on here that excludes Lewis being some sort of god.

I can handle that no problem. Suggesting that his wheel rim failed because of a manufacturing fault, rather than driving issue, and that his gearbox failed for similar reasons, is hardly elevating him to the status of a god. If you really think that blaming these car failures as being much more likely from design or manufacture issues, rather than driver, is elevating Lewis to the status of a god then it is your compass that is out.

#3819 gricey1981

gricey1981
  • Member

  • 1,176 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 27 April 2011 - 12:20

It seems to me that Rocket has watched F1 for the last 2 seasons only.

The BAR Hondas were hardly dogs, neither was the Williams that Button started his career with. The Renault was not the best but it was onluy really in 07-08 that Jenson had a dog. The rest of the time they were decently mid field or even best of the rest after Ferrari. Certainley the BAR of 04 was better than Hamiltons Mclaren in 09 relatively.

Advertisement

#3820 fed up

fed up
  • Member

  • 1,953 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 27 April 2011 - 14:12

It seems to me that Rocket has watched F1 for the last 2 seasons only.

The BAR Hondas were hardly dogs, neither was the Williams that Button started his career with. The Renault was not the best but it was onluy really in 07-08 that Jenson had a dog. The rest of the time they were decently mid field or even best of the rest after Ferrari. Certainley the BAR of 04 was better than Hamiltons Mclaren in 09 relatively.


Indeed!

Jenson was paired with Ralf in his rookie year:

Button finished his impressive debut season in eighth place with 12 points (Ralf Schumacher finished fifth with 24)


Lewis was paired with Alonso in his rookie year and we know what happened there.

Jenson is an above average driver - no more no less. Lewis is a superstar driver :up:

#3821 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,194 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 14:16

Indeed!

Jenson was paired with Ralf in his rookie year:



Lewis was paired with Alonso in his rookie year and we know what happened there.

Jenson is an above average driver - no more no less. Lewis is a superstar driver :up:

Comparing LH's and JB's performance as rookies is just ridiculous if you have any knowledge at all of their respective paths to F1.

Edited by trogggy, 27 April 2011 - 14:17.


#3822 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 2,814 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 27 April 2011 - 14:38

Certainley the BAR of 04 was better than Hamiltons Mclaren in 09 relatively.

It was and it wasn't. It was overall a rather good car but at only one race (Monza) it seemed to be even a remote challenger for a race win besides the Ferraris. It was Button's consistency racking up podiums that gave them the second in CC.

And Benetton 2001 was certainly nothing to write home about. Though a good thing came out of it - Button learnt a bit how to setup a car. He was absolutely clueless before in that particular regard.

#3823 hotstickyslick

hotstickyslick
  • Member

  • 3,385 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 14:44

It was and it wasn't. It was overall a rather good car but at only one race (Monza) it seemed to be even a remote challenger for a race win besides the Ferraris. It was Button's consistency racking up podiums that gave them the second in CC.

It was and it was. I think being in the fight for a podium every race is better than being occasionally in the points, occasionally on the podium and occasionally fighting for a victory and a couple of select tracks. Sato managed to get a podium in the 2004 BAR ffs.

#3824 gricey1981

gricey1981
  • Member

  • 1,176 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 27 April 2011 - 15:01

It was and it wasn't. It was overall a rather good car but at only one race (Monza) it seemed to be even a remote challenger for a race win besides the Ferraris. It was Button's consistency racking up podiums that gave them the second in CC.

And Benetton 2001 was certainly nothing to write home about. Though a good thing came out of it - Button learnt a bit how to setup a car. He was absolutely clueless before in that particular regard.


Come on the BAR that year was the 2nd best car. Button drove phenomonally well though. Would have been a very boring season if not for that. I never liked Coulthard so it was good to see a British guy on the podium consistently again.

I have to say I was a massive Button fan before Lewis came along. Now I support them both but Lewis is much more exciting to watch and I do root for him before Jenson.

Jenson still has the hotter girlfriend though. He deserves a lot of credit for that. I told my wife if Jessica comes a calling I will be off like a flash! :love: :love:


#3825 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 2,814 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 27 April 2011 - 15:02

It was and it was. I think being in the fight for a podium every race is better than being occasionally in the points, occasionally on the podium and occasionally fighting for a victory and a couple of select tracks. Sato managed to get a podium in the 2004 BAR ffs.

Well it isn't if there is one car that is able to lap the field pretty much every time it bothers to and it almost never breaks down.
2009 there were Brawn races, Red Bull races, and towards the end some Mac races. Even Renault won one on merit. And every single race driver would give up 30 podiums for one win.

#3826 fed up

fed up
  • Member

  • 1,953 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 27 April 2011 - 15:02

The BAR of 2004 had that illegal fuel tank - no wonder it was fast :smoking:

#3827 hotstickyslick

hotstickyslick
  • Member

  • 3,385 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 15:23

Well it isn't if there is one car that is able to lap the field pretty much every time it bothers to and it almost never breaks down.
2009 there were Brawn races, Red Bull races, and towards the end some Mac races. Even Renault won one on merit. And every single race driver would give up 30 podiums for one win.

What does the F2004 have to do with things?

Kovalainen didn't get a single podium in 2009, we forget Hamilton wasn't the only driver of that unbalanced piece of crap.

Um, aren't we talking about the overall picture here? 30 podiums is worth a hell of aloat more than a single win.

#3828 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,194 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 15:45

Kovalainen didn't get a single podium in 2009, we forget Hamilton wasn't the only driver of that unbalanced piece of crap.

How did Heikki manage to put an 'unbalanced piece of crap' on the front row of the grid exactly?

#3829 hotstickyslick

hotstickyslick
  • Member

  • 3,385 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 15:54

How did Heikki manage to put an 'unbalanced piece of crap' on the front row of the grid exactly?

How did he manage not to get a podium? How did Senna not win in Brazil 1994 despite getting pole position?

Comparing the 04 BAR to the 09 McLaren, it was an UPOC. I do see Kovalainen as a more talented driver than Sato, mind.

#3830 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,194 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 15:56

How did he manage not to get a podium?

He didn't perform well enough in races. Hence he was replaced.

Is that news?

#3831 hotstickyslick

hotstickyslick
  • Member

  • 3,385 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 16:05

He didn't perform well enough in races. Hence he was replaced.

Is that news?

Kind of like Senna in Brazil '94, hence he was beaten by teammate and lost the race. Not that I'm comparing Senna and Kovalainen ( :lol: ) just that their situations were similar.

It shouldn't be news to anyone, but then that's not really the point.

#3832 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,162 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 16:43

Well, that statement is a long way from what kicked all this off, which was that those failures were partly his fault. Being unable to rule out 100% blame is not the same as ascribing some blame. So at least you seem to be coming round to a more reasonable view now. Perhaps if you had presented things in this fashion earlier there would have been less of an issue?


And in their time together at McLaren it is 2 race ending mechanical failures vs 1. Over a sample set of about 20 races. Neither the difference in failures nor the sample set seems sufficiently large to me to draw the conclusion that Hamilton is harder on his car and this leads to race ending failures.


I agree that Lewis had more race ending driver errors than Jenson last year.

I'd also suggest that Spain, Hungary and Japan (second failure) were extremely likely* not Hamilton's fault. And that the likely points loss from these incidents outweigh Jenson's points loss from his 'no fault' incidents at Monaco and Spa. In which case Jenson was lucky to not have been beaten by a slightly larger margin last year.

(*see, I agree with you that 'ultimately we can't say [definitively] it wasn't in some way his fault', but I think the balance of the evidence we have makes a claim of 'extremely likely' a perfectly fair one)


I can handle that no problem. Suggesting that his wheel rim failed because of a manufacturing fault, rather than driving issue, and that his gearbox failed for similar reasons, is hardly elevating him to the status of a god. If you really think that blaming these car failures as being much more likely from design or manufacture issues, rather than driver, is elevating Lewis to the status of a god then it is your compass that is out.


Well if you read my original post, thats exactly how it was presented.

#3833 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 2,814 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 27 April 2011 - 16:44

How did he manage not to get a podium? How did Senna not win in Brazil 1994 despite getting pole position?

Ahh! Now I get it! That must mean that Hamilton is better than Senna! :clap:

#3834 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 27 April 2011 - 16:47

Well if you read my original post, thats exactly how it was presented.

It was presented as "I can't rule out driver influence 100%, therefore I will ascribe it as part fault". The first part of that statement I consider reasonable, the second part I don't.

#3835 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,312 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 27 April 2011 - 16:52

The BAR of 2004 had that illegal fuel tank - no wonder it was fast :smoking:

Nonsense. That was a 2005 development.

#3836 hotstickyslick

hotstickyslick
  • Member

  • 3,385 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 16:54

Ahh! Now I get it! That must mean that Hamilton is better than Senna! :clap:

Well, judging by your previous posts, I'm not surprised that you came to that conclusion. :lol:

By the way, Renault did not win a race in 2009.

#3837 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,194 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 16:55

Kind of like Senna in Brazil '94, hence he was beaten by teammate and lost the race. Not that I'm comparing Senna and Kovalainen ( :lol: ) just that their situations were similar.

It shouldn't be news to anyone, but then that's not really the point.

Lewis can win races driving an unstable p.o.s.

We get it.

:rolleyes:

#3838 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,814 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 16:59

It was presented as "I can't rule out driver influence 100%, therefore I will ascribe it as part fault". The first part of that statement I consider reasonable, the second part I don't.

:up: go easy on him. :lol:

#3839 hotstickyslick

hotstickyslick
  • Member

  • 3,385 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 17:07

Lewis can win races driving an unstable p.o.s.

We get it.

:rolleyes:

Jesus, you still don't get it? So what if you qualify ahead? It doesn't mean shit if you finish behind, does it? That's the point I'm trying to make, I thought it was obvious enough. Senna's Williams was fast but poorly balanced and that hurt it in races which was why he was totally outpaced by Schumacher in the Benetton. Similar to the 2009 McLaren during the second half of the year which over a single lap was impressive, but not always over a race stint. Capiche?


It's better to have a good car everywhere rather than a great car at a couple of races and an okay-ish car everywhere else.

Advertisement

#3840 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,194 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 17:09

Jesus, you still don't get it? So what if you qualify ahead? It doesn't mean shit if you finish behind, does it? That's the point I'm trying to make, I thought it was obvious enough. Senna's Williams was fast but poorly balanced and that hurt it in races which was why he was totally outpaced by Schumacher in the Benetton. Similar to the 2009 McLaren during the second half of the year which over a single lap was impressive, but not always over a race stint. Capiche?


It's better to have a good car everywhere rather than a great car at a couple of races and an okay-ish car everywhere else.

Your point seems to be that Lewis is amazing. No?

#3841 hotstickyslick

hotstickyslick
  • Member

  • 3,385 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 17:17

Your point seems to be that Lewis is amazing. No?

BAR 006>MP4-24. That's my point. Not everyone's a rabid fanatic in this thread you know, so you shouldn't bother trying to spin things in that way all the time.

#3842 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,194 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 17:27

BAR 006>MP4-24. That's my point. Not everyone's a rabid fanatic in this thread you know, so you shouldn't bother trying to spin things in that way all the time.


MP24>BAR 006

That makes just as much sense.

Beef>Chicken
Frisbee>Bicycle

#3843 bauss

bauss
  • Member

  • 4,962 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 18:02

Your point seems to be that Lewis is amazing. No?


:rotfl: this strawman fallback is time proven evidence that someone can see his argument slipping away :lol: :lol:

#3844 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,194 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 18:08

:rotfl: this strawman fallback is time proven evidence that someone can see his argument slipping away :lol: :lol:

Explain the point then. I can't see the point if it's not that LH is great. What else is there that's relevant to this thread?


#3845 gricey1981

gricey1981
  • Member

  • 1,176 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 27 April 2011 - 18:11

Explain the point then. I can't see the point if it's not that LH is great. What else is there that's relevant to this thread?


Well the original arguement was from Rocket stating that you could not compare Lewis car breaking down with Buttons car breaking down over the course of their respective careers as Button had always driven a dog.

It was then pointed out that Button had not always driven a dog and in fact the BAR 006 was pretty competitive perhaps even more competitive than the MP24 driven by Lewis.

The point being that you could compare the stats.

Somehow that was taken to mean that Lewis is a driving god. Which of course he is so I guess thats cool too.

Edited by gricey1981, 27 April 2011 - 18:14.


#3846 Grenada

Grenada
  • Member

  • 3,064 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 27 April 2011 - 18:34

Well the original arguement was from Rocket stating that you could not compare Lewis car breaking down with Buttons car breaking down over the course of their respective careers as Button had always driven a dog.

It was then pointed out that Button had not always driven a dog and in fact the BAR 006 was pretty competitive perhaps even more competitive than the MP24 driven by Lewis.

The point being that you could compare the stats.

Somehow that was taken to mean that Lewis is a driving god. Which of course he is so I guess thats cool too.



:up:

#3847 hotstickyslick

hotstickyslick
  • Member

  • 3,385 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 18:38

MP24>BAR 006

That makes just as much sense.

Beef>Chicken
Frisbee>Bicycle

Explain. Or would you make things even more unnecessarily stupid than it already is?

#3848 Watkins74

Watkins74
  • Member

  • 5,712 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 18:42

I am so old that I remember when this guys actually had to shift for real and a driver could grenade his engine by mis-shifting. I don't think a driver has much input over it's reliabilty anymore. There hasn't been enough reliabilty issues with the 25 or 26 to even have this argument in my mind.

But don't let me put a damper on the discussion....please continue. :smoking:

Edited by Watkins74, 27 April 2011 - 18:51.


#3849 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,194 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 21:38

Explain. Or would you make things even more unnecessarily stupid than it already is?

The point is that it is stupid.

The BAR was consistently pretty good. But never, ever, at any point the best or close to the best car.
The Mclaren started off rubbish and ended up the best car at at least some circuits.
The only motivation I can see for you making your Mclaren=crap claim is to big-up Lewis Hamilton. It was clearly the best car at some tracks in '09.

#3850 ImDDAA

ImDDAA
  • Member

  • 3,226 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 21:42

The point is that it is stupid.

The BAR was consistently pretty good. But never, ever, at any point the best or close to the best car.
The Mclaren started off rubbish and ended up the best car at at least some circuits.
The only motivation I can see for you making your Mclaren=crap claim is to big-up Lewis Hamilton. It was clearly the best car at some tracks in '09.


OK, but this all stemmed from someone saying you had to be selective with how you looked at Jensons career because it didn't favor the theory that Jenson has had no mech failures.

Lewis Hamilton has never had a mechanical failure, this season.