Jump to content


Photo

Lewis and Jenson scorecard 2011 (merged)


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

#3851 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,247 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 21:42

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.

Comparing reliability today in one team with reliability 7 years ago in a different one is just silly.
If you want me to justify that I'll be happy to, but you shouldn't need it explaining to you.
And just to be clear, I've argued that Hamilton's breakdowns last year can't be laid at his door - Rocket's point about reliability is equally silly in my eyes.

Advertisement

#3852 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,247 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 21:46

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.

It's reasonable to say that if you want to compare LH and JB you can only look at the time they've spent in comparable cars. Bringing stuff up that happened 9 or 7 years ago in effectively a different era isn't valid.
I don't think it's reasonable to compare reliability at all, though, because it isn't clear that a driving style can (in today's cars) impact on it and the numbers are far too small to be meaningful.
Fair enough?

Edited by trogggy, 27 April 2011 - 21:48.


#3853 ImDDAA

ImDDAA
  • Member

  • 3,226 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 22:01

It's reasonable to say that if you want to compare LH and JB you can only look at the time they've spent in comparable cars. Bringing stuff up that happened 9 or 7 years ago in effectively a different era isn't valid.
I don't think it's reasonable to compare reliability at all, though, because it isn't clear that a driving style can (in today's cars) impact on it and the numbers are far too small to be meaningful.
Fair enough?


I agree, it's not reasonable to compare in the first place - the initial claim wasn't based on any evidence, just passive aggressive prodding.

However, if you read the interchange you'll understand how we arrived at a place where recalling stuff that happened years ago is just a natural evolution of the conversation.

For example, when Lewis had gearbox problems in Japan people blamed his driving style, the naturual reaction is to see how his driving style has effect his gear boxes in the past. When his driving style was arguably at it's most aggressive in '07 and '08 how many gear boxes failed during races? etc Suddenly we're in the past again. That's how these things work.

#3854 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,247 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 22:09

I agree, it's not reasonable to compare in the first place - the initial claim wasn't based on any evidence, just passive aggressive prodding.

However, if you read the interchange you'll understand how we arrived at a place where recalling stuff that happened years ago is just a natural evolution of the conversation.

For example, when Lewis had gearbox problems in Japan people blamed his driving style, the naturual reaction is to see how his driving style has effect his gear boxes in the past. When his driving style was arguably at it's most aggressive in '07 and '08 how many gear boxes failed during races? etc Suddenly we're in the past again. That's how these things work.

Sure.
And one daft claim leads to another.
The result is two daft claims, not a sensible debate.

#3855 ImDDAA

ImDDAA
  • Member

  • 3,226 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 22:11

Sure.
And one daft claim leads to another.
The result is two daft claims, not a sensible debate.


Depends if people are prepared to look at the evidence and judge it reasonably.

#3856 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 8,354 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 27 April 2011 - 22:21

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:


I agree- 2v1 on retirements, and a grand total of 3 out of 74 starts for Hamilton. Hardly a glaring trend from which to form a firm view, although that isn't stopping some from trying! Sort of reminds me how peeps used to wail at Montoya for being a car breaker, ignoring that his car was the most reliable in the field outside of the two bullet proof Ferrari's in 2002 and 2003....... car engineering is the deciding factor, race retirements due to unreliabillity are few and far between these days.

Edited by P123, 27 April 2011 - 22:25.


#3857 jjcale

jjcale
  • Member

  • 7,282 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 27 April 2011 - 22:22

Depends if people are prepared to look at the evidence and judge it reasonably.


Youre going off topic.... Lewis is fantistic, OK ;)

#3858 jjcale

jjcale
  • Member

  • 7,282 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 27 April 2011 - 22:26

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:


Nonsense.... if he fails to cosy up to his mechanics or pisses of the TP, his engine will flood, his tyres will be suddendly undrivable and other disasters will happen.... Just look at MW's season to date... Bet he'll never say "not bad for a No 2 driver again" ;)

#3859 Rocket73

Rocket73
  • Member

  • 1,472 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 22:39

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.



apart from flat spotting his tyres at malaysia and losing a bunch of points - easily enough to lose a championship.

that's what happens when you drive too hard :lol:

(joke)  ;)


btw i have been watchng f1 for over 30 years. just that my memory is rather hazy :blush:

Advertisement

#3860 Rocket73

Rocket73
  • Member

  • 1,472 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 22:40

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.


when did jenson last have a mechanical failure apart from monaco? bet you have to look it up

#3861 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 27 April 2011 - 22:48

when did jenson last have a mechanical failure apart from monaco? bet you have to look it up


He retired due to a leaking radiator at Spa last year.
I know that most people think that this was caused by Vettel colliding with him but if you study the video you can see steam before contact is made. It was clearly Jenson over driving.

#3862 jjcale

jjcale
  • Member

  • 7,282 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 27 April 2011 - 22:59

He retired due to a leaking radiator at Spa last year.
I know that most people think that this was caused by Vettel colliding with him but if you study the video you can see steam before contact is made. It was clearly Jenson over driving.


Nah... it was probably that big magnet right by his radiator that also drew in poor SV's car.

#3863 hotstickyslick

hotstickyslick
  • Member

  • 3,390 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 23:31

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.

Really?

The Mclaren started off rubbish and ended up the best car at at least some circuits.

Singapore and Abu Dhabi?

The only motivation I can see for you making your Mclaren=crap claim is to big-up Lewis Hamilton.

Then your train of thought is close-minded.


I'd rather be in an 04 BAR than an 09 McLaren - get it? Will you ever?

#3864 bauss

bauss
  • Member

  • 5,009 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 23:34

the only reason he was under attack by Seb while his teammate (Lewis the driving god) was miles away was because he damaged his frontwing earlier on.
It was all his fault, Jenson can be so reckless attimes








:D

#3865 gricey1981

gricey1981
  • Member

  • 1,180 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 27 April 2011 - 23:39

the only reason he was under attack by Seb while his teammate (Lewis the driving god) was miles away was because he damaged his frontwing earlier on.
It was all his fault, Jenson can be so reckless attimes








:D


I think we should all say Lewis the Driving God when ever he is mentioned from hence forth and Jenson can be "the holy smooth one" and then that should keep everyone happy! :cat:

#3866 simplyfast

simplyfast
  • Member

  • 867 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 23:52

I think we should all say Lewis the Driving God when ever he is mentioned from hence forth and Jenson can be "the holy smooth one" and then that should keep everyone happy! :cat:

If you dont mind i will stick to the best driver pairing in F1 right now :clap:
and be very happy.

#3867 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,247 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 April 2011 - 23:55

Really?
Singapore and Abu Dhabi?
Then your train of thought is close-minded.
I'd rather be in an 04 BAR than an 09 McLaren - get it? Will you ever?

This is going nowhere. I have no idea what you're trying to prove here - it's obviously not that Lewis is fantastic, you've said not - it's obviously not that Lewis is kinder to his machinery, because how fast the cars were has no relevance to that and the cars were very different back then - so it's obviously something else relevant to Jenson / Lewis in 2011. Which, you're right, I don't get.


#3868 AMG FAN

AMG FAN
  • Member

  • 890 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 28 April 2011 - 05:26

when did jenson last have a mechanical failure apart from monaco? bet you have to look it up

Hamilton went from Germany 2007 all the way to Abu Dhabi 2009 before he got his second ever retirement,that is 41 races without a retirement,all that proves to me is that the Mclaren is one heck of a reliable car not that Lewis is so good on being easy on the engine like you claim for Button....in your eyes Button is God.

#3869 AMG FAN

AMG FAN
  • Member

  • 890 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 28 April 2011 - 05:31

apart from flat spotting his tyres at malaysia and losing a bunch of points - easily enough to lose a championship.

that's what happens when you drive too hard :lol:

(joke) ;)


btw i have been watchng f1 for over 30 years. just that my memory is rather hazy :blush:

if you have watched f1 for 30 years you would know that flat spotting a tyre is different from having a mechanical issue and retiring....and if you would take a dig at Lewis about flat spotting you'd want to research on your god first,didn't he have a major flat spot in China? which even led to Brundle suggesting that it was why Button was made to pit early. :rotfl: i guess Jenson drives just as hard as Lewis.

#3870 WitnessX

WitnessX
  • Member

  • 1,161 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 07:04

Reminds me of this:

< Link: 1972 prototype for this thread >

...tick..tick 1 week to go..tick..tick.. ;)

#3871 Rocket73

Rocket73
  • Member

  • 1,472 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 07:31

if you have watched f1 for 30 years you would know that flat spotting a tyre is different from having a mechanical issue and retiring....and if you would take a dig at Lewis about flat spotting you'd want to research on your god first,didn't he have a major flat spot in China? which even led to Brundle suggesting that it was why Button was made to pit early. :rotfl: i guess Jenson drives just as hard as Lewis.


what part of (joke)  ;) don't you understand?

#3872 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,274 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 07:46

Not really fair to compare when Jenson spent so much time in self destructing Hondas (in an era when cars were much less reliable) in midfield getting rammed by all and sundry.

They have only been in comparable equipment in the last 2 years and this one.

2009:

Jenson: Belgium - Rammed by Grosjean - no fault

Lewis: Australia - Disqualified - part fault
Belgium - Rammed by Alguersuari - no fault
Brazil - Brake issue - part fault

2010:

Jenson: Monaco - Sidepod plug left in by engineer - no fault
Belgium - Rammed by Vettel - no fault

Lewis: Spain - Wheelrim - part fault
Hungary - Gearbox - part fault
Italy - Hit Massa - whole fault
Singapore - Incident with Webber - part fault

2011: No issues

Nobody can know how much a driver is to blame for mechanical issues but it cannot be denied that drivers have some effect on this so I've assigned part fault.

So in all Jenson has had 3 retirements through absolutely no fault of his own.

Lewis has had 7 retirements, 1 no fault, 5 part fault and 1 totally his fault.

Slightly different story.



Spain was the rim I believe and Hungary the gearbox, the brake issue was Brazil.

As I said, nobody can know whether a particular incident was driver fault or production fault. Equally it cannot be denied that the way you drive the car effects it's reliability, this is a fact of racing. The likelyhood is that some of the of the incidents were production faults and some driver faults. If you consider the gearbox issue for instance, Lewis broke 3 gearboxes to Jensons none, so it's hard to absolve him of all responsibility. Therefore you can guess and say 3 were production and 2 were driver or assign part fault to all (more accurate I believe because it's generally a bit of both ) . If you like I could say 3 totally his fault and 4 no fault but I think that gives a less accurate picture.

I'm not applying fault to any particular incident
, apart from Massa :)



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.


That is how I presented it, I cannot see how you can statistically represent it in a fairer way. You can't say for sure any of the incidents were totally Lewis' fault and neither can you say they definitely weren't, you can only apply a statistical spread.

#3873 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,619 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 28 April 2011 - 08:06

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.


This.

Button drove some good cars but he wasn't such a good driver in first 3-4 seasons of his career. If he were as prepared as Lewis Hamilton when he entered F1, those cars would suddenly look much, much better and everyone would say he was driving top cars. And Button would be regarded as much better driver today.

Let me say that I for one think Button was superb in 2009., but I can understand where the detractors about 2009. came from - its from his early career. Not so much 2007. and 2008. at Honda, that car was junk, but some of his cars early in career were indeed great, but Button simply wasn't a top driver back there.

Didn't Frank Williams say for Button that he will be great driver one day, but it wasn't gonna be so fast (when Button entered F1)?

Edited by velgajski1, 28 April 2011 - 08:28.


#3874 mlsnoopy

mlsnoopy
  • Member

  • 2,356 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 08:19

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.


1, Who knows what a better driver could do in a Bar.
2. But why didn't Kovalainen do anything special with the McLaren? Why was it always Hamilton that got the result.
3. Again why was always Hamilton that fought at the front of the grid, where as Kovalainen finished in the midfield?

#3875 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,659 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 28 April 2011 - 08:36

1, Who knows what a better driver could do in a Bar.

You mean a decent driver, like a world championship winner?

#3876 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 2,875 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 28 April 2011 - 08:39

1, Who knows what a better driver could do in a Bar.
2. But why didn't Kovalainen do anything special with the McLaren? Why was it always Hamilton that got the result.
3. Again why was always Hamilton that fought at the front of the grid, where as Kovalainen finished in the midfield?

Again I am forecasting a shocker here. In a minute someone will jump in and declare "Hamilton is better than Kovalainen!" Stop the press! The world has to know!

Also, the second one - "Kovalainen put the car to it's rightful position but the brilliance of Hamilton made it a winner!"

Ahh the good ole days of Eddie Irvine-in-a-Ferrari come to mind.

#3877 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 28 April 2011 - 08:41

That is how I presented it, I cannot see how you can statistically represent it in a fairer way. You can't say for sure any of the incidents were totally Lewis' fault and neither can you say they definitely weren't, you can only apply a statistical spread.

Where in your "part fault" do you recognise this statistical spread? Somewhere between 1% and 99% fault? Where in that range do you see it?

#3878 bauss

bauss
  • Member

  • 5,009 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 08:42

You mean a decent driver, like a world championship winner?


no, like a driving god




:p

#3879 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 28 April 2011 - 08:49

I'd rather be in an 04 BAR than an 09 McLaren - get it? Will you ever?

Depends what you are judging it on.

For total points over a season, I'd rather the 04 BAR (vs 04 competition, obviously).

For chances to actually win one race or more in a season, I'd rather the 09 McLaren (vs 09 competition).

04 Jenson achieved what his car gave him, IMO, scoring 47% of the points available to him vs the 28% 09 Hamilton scored (also, that's with the scoring system being unfavourable to Jenson in this comparison). 09 Hamilton achieved what his car gave him too, scoring 2 wins vs the 0 that 04 Jenson scored.

I don't see that there's much more to say from those seasons than that both drivers did a very good job.

Advertisement

#3880 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 28 April 2011 - 09:00

Depends what you are judging it on.

For total points over a season, I'd rather the 04 BAR (vs 04 competition, obviously).

For chances to actually win one race or more in a season, I'd rather the 09 McLaren (vs 09 competition).

04 Jenson achieved what his car gave him, IMO, scoring 47% of the points available to him vs the 28% 09 Hamilton scored (also, that's with the scoring system being unfavourable to Jenson in this comparison). 09 Hamilton achieved what his car gave him too, scoring 2 wins vs the 0 that 04 Jenson scored.

I don't see that there's much more to say from those seasons than that both drivers did a very good job.


That is a highly unsatisfactory conclusion. If this thread it must be stated, with certainty, which driver did the better job.


#3881 Grenada

Grenada
  • Member

  • 3,066 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 09:43

I think we should all say Lewis the Driving God when ever he is mentioned from hence forth and Jenson can be "the holy smooth one" and then that should keep everyone happy! :cat:



:lol: You make me laugh.

#3882 mlsnoopy

mlsnoopy
  • Member

  • 2,356 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 10:49

You mean a decent driver, like a world championship winner?


No I mean a better driver than Button. He is not the best driver ever.

#3883 mlsnoopy

mlsnoopy
  • Member

  • 2,356 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 10:55

Again I am forecasting a shocker here. In a minute someone will jump in and declare "Hamilton is better than Kovalainen!" Stop the press! The world has to know!

Also, the second one - "Kovalainen put the car to it's rightful position but the brilliance of Hamilton made it a winner!"

Ahh the good ole days of Eddie Irvine-in-a-Ferrari come to mind.


Then tell me why was Kovalainen regularly so far down the grid. If Hamilton wasn't driving the car, now nobody would be saying that it was the best car on the grid.

#3884 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 2,875 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 28 April 2011 - 11:29

Then tell me why was Kovalainen regularly so far down the grid. If Hamilton wasn't driving the car, now nobody would be saying that it was the best car on the grid.


Uh-oh, because Kovalainen regularly qualified with one-stop race in mind whilst Hamilton with 2 stop one? You know they had race starting fuel onboard back then, right? Their Q2 results weren't THAT differing.

#3885 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,922 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 28 April 2011 - 11:33

Uh-oh, because Kovalainen regularly qualified with one-stop race in mind whilst Hamilton with 2 stop one? You know they had race starting fuel onboard back then, right? Their Q2 results weren't THAT differing.


lol, the only race I can remember HK was on a one stop was Monza, the best strategy of the weekend and he was nowhere. Ham was "battling" it out with a two stopper against the BGP's.


#3886 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 2,875 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 28 April 2011 - 11:36

lol, the only race I can remember HK was on a one stop was Monza, the best strategy of the weekend and he was nowhere. Ham was "battling" it out with a two stopper against the BGP's.

Well the fact that it's the only race YOU remember it happening is not exactly the same that it was the only time that WAS happening, right?;)

#3887 hotstickyslick

hotstickyslick
  • Member

  • 3,390 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 11:41

Depends what you are judging it on.

For total points over a season, I'd rather the 04 BAR (vs 04 competition, obviously).

For chances to actually win one race or more in a season, I'd rather the 09 McLaren (vs 09 competition).

04 Jenson achieved what his car gave him, IMO, scoring 47% of the points available to him vs the 28% 09 Hamilton scored (also, that's with the scoring system being unfavourable to Jenson in this comparison). 09 Hamilton achieved what his car gave him too, scoring 2 wins vs the 0 that 04 Jenson scored.

I don't see that there's much more to say from those seasons than that both drivers did a very good job.

Well seeing as how I value end of the year championship points more than anything else, I have to go with the 2004 BAR.


Kovalainen was often close to Hamilton in qualifying, but then he wore his tyres out pretty bad in comparison.

#3888 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,922 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 28 April 2011 - 11:43

Well the fact that it's the only race YOU remember it happening is not exactly the same that it was the only time that WAS happening, right?;)


HK's race pace was mediocre to awful from 2008 to 2009 and that certainly wasn't because of 1-2 more laps of fuel during Q.

#3889 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 2,875 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 28 April 2011 - 11:49

HK's race pace was mediocre to awful from 2008 to 2009 and that certainly wasn't because of 1-2 more laps of fuel during Q.

His race pace definitely was awful. The question was why was he so down compared to Ham in quali. The answer is - he often qualified with the intent of doing one stop less than Ham. His problem was - like Singapore 09 AFAIK - that he couldn't hold on to his quali position with a heavier car during the early part of the race.

#3890 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 12:06

His race pace definitely was awful. The question was why was he so down compared to Ham in quali. The answer is - he often qualified with the intent of doing one stop less than Ham. His problem was - like Singapore 09 AFAIK - that he couldn't hold on to his quali position with a heavier car during the early part of the race.


I think his race pace defecit was a mixture of simply not being as relentless as Hamilton, but probably more an issue to do with his tyres and how he used them. As I understand it, he actually wore out his tyres more than LH with his cornering technique, which effectively made the radius of the corner longer, and then he probably wasn't as adept at handling the resulting oversteer from his worn rears.

Makes sense to me given how close he was to Hamilton in qualifying so often, even on higher fuel loads.

#3891 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,659 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 28 April 2011 - 12:10

No I mean a better driver than Button. He is not the best driver ever.

Nice strawman :lol: I knew exactly what your subtle bash was getting at.

#3892 AMG FAN

AMG FAN
  • Member

  • 890 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 28 April 2011 - 12:12

His race pace definitely was awful. The question was why was he so down compared to Ham in quali. The answer is - he often qualified with the intent of doing one stop less than Ham. His problem was - like Singapore 09 AFAIK - that he couldn't hold on to his quali position with a heavier car during the early part of the race.

why you talking rubbish? Heikki only did a one stopper in Monza,he often stopped much later than Lewis because his race pace was horrible,what was the point of having him stop early when all he ever did was slide back at the start of races....were do you get this idea that he always did one stops?

#3893 Hairpin

Hairpin
  • Member

  • 4,468 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 28 April 2011 - 12:14

His race pace definitely was awful. The question was why was he so down compared to Ham in quali. The answer is - he often qualified with the intent of doing one stop less than Ham. His problem was - like Singapore 09 AFAIK - that he couldn't hold on to his quali position with a heavier car during the early part of the race.

Is that really the answer? McLaren have an enormous amount of routine and until this year, optimum strategy was normally quite easy to predict. Why would McLaren constantly put him on a bad strategy?

#3894 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 2,875 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 28 April 2011 - 12:27

why you talking rubbish? Heikki only did a one stopper in Monza,he often stopped much later than Lewis because his race pace was horrible,what was the point of having him stop early when all he ever did was slide back at the start of races....

Ahh, so while perhaps he was doing similar amount of stits his race strategies were less aggressive due to the fact that he WAS stopping later and WAS heavier, right? So, anybody care to do the math on how much is 10 laps worth of fuel going to add to the laptime?


were do you get this idea that he always did one stops?

Would you please be so kind and indicate where I said THAT. Thanks.


#3895 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 2,875 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 28 April 2011 - 12:29

Is that really the answer? McLaren have an enormous amount of routine and until this year, optimum strategy was normally quite easy to predict. Why would McLaren constantly put him on a bad strategy?

I.
Really.
Do.
Not.
Know.

You see I am not the strategist at McLaren. You should ask them. Perhaps they thought that for Heikki that strategy was optimal. There even was an Autosport article back then about the differing strategies McLaren used back then.

#3896 gricey1981

gricey1981
  • Member

  • 1,180 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 28 April 2011 - 12:39

I think one of the reasons Heikki was further back was that he did not get all the new developmental parts as quickly as Lewis the driving god did in 09 at least.

Cant really blame Macca for that as Heikki did wreck himself for no reason at the start of the season. Was it in malaysia when he just seemed to sdrive into the wall.

Edited by gricey1981, 28 April 2011 - 12:41.


#3897 Bonaventura

Bonaventura
  • Member

  • 7,698 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 28 April 2011 - 12:41

I think one of the reasons Heikki was further back was that he did not get all the new developmental parts as quickly as Lewis did in 09 at least.

Cant really blame Macca for that as Heikki did wreck himself for no reason at the start of the season. Was it in malaysia when he just seemed to sdrive into the wall.

It was only 1 time, at Germany 2009

#3898 bauss

bauss
  • Member

  • 5,009 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 12:49

I think one of the reasons Heikki was further back was that he did not get all the new developmental parts as quickly as Lewis the driving god did in 09 at least.


That only happened once, in Germany.

As for Force Ten, where did you fill your head with this rubbish of Heikki always stopping one time less? once again, this happened only once, in Monza.


As far as Q2 pace, even though its an unreliable barometer (as the primary objective of q2 is get to q3), we did the calculation and Lewis beat Heikki in q2s of each year overall.

Heikki's race pace didnt look good in 09, but there were factors...mainly because the car, even after the upgrades was reported to still handle terribly (by both drivers) and the fact that his teammate (in the last years of the sprint racing era) is Lewis, the driving god.

Edited by bauss, 28 April 2011 - 12:51.


#3899 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 2,875 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 28 April 2011 - 12:54

That only happened once, in Germany.

As for Force Ten, where did you fill your head with this rubbish of Heikki always stopping one time less? once again, this happened only once, in Monza.

Well I might have remembered it incorrectly. Happens, you know. I don't have Forix in my head. What DID happen was that Heikki USUALLY qualified heavier and was utilizing less aggressive race strategies. Especially in 2009.

As far as Q2 pace, even though its an unreliable barometer (as the primary objective of q2 is get to q3), we did the calculation and Lewis beat Heikki in q2s of each year overall.

Yes, again, it obviously comes as a shocker that Lewis is genereally considered as a better Formula One driver, the point was that their difference in Q2 was usually less than their Q3 difference and their race pace difference.

Advertisement

#3900 gricey1981

gricey1981
  • Member

  • 1,180 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 28 April 2011 - 12:55

That only happened once, in Germany.

As for Force Ten, where did you fill your head with this rubbish of Heikki always stopping one time less? once again, this happened only once, in Monza.


As far as Q2 pace, even though its an unreliable barometer (as the primary objective of q2 is get to q3), we did the calculation and Lewis beat Heikki in q2s of each year overall.

Heikki's race pace didnt look good in 09, but there were factors...mainly because the car, even after the upgrades was reported to still handle terribly (by both drivers) and the fact that his teammate (in the last years of the sprint racing era) is Lewis, the driving god.


I believe that the "The" in "the driving god" should be capitalized as he is The Driving God