Jump to content


Photo

Lewis and Jenson scorecard 2011 (merged)


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

#3901 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,476 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 28 April 2011 - 13:07

Back to 2011 please - Lewis v Jenson.

Advertisement

#3902 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,018 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 13:18

Autosport magazine concludes their article about button by stating that his greatest strength at mclaren is essentially being unfazed bt the fact that lewis is slightly quicker more often than not.

Thought I'd bring it up because I seem to remember a poster on here, probably in this thread, saying the same thing so kudos to you sir (or madam!):)

Interesting that they also talk about the trust the team have in button, ever since he made the correct pit call in oz. Interesting how close these things could be, if he’d gone off a bit harder and not rejoined or damaged the car I wonder whether that would have made any difference to the perception of him at mclaren?

Also I really want some info, that we'll never get, from someone at mclaren about how they go with button over lewis whenever they disagree on set up etc. Several times the media have insinuated that he is technically better than Hamilton, that he can give more precise feedback and that they trust him more from that perspective, I really would like something more concrete either way. For example the media also wank on about button's smooth tyre preserving skills but mclaren are on record as saying they don't see any difference between the two in terms of tyre usage,.

Edited by robefc, 28 April 2011 - 13:36.


#3903 Hairpin

Hairpin
  • Member

  • 4,468 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 28 April 2011 - 13:25

Also I really want some info, that we'll never get, from someone at mclaren about how they go with button over lewis whenever they disagree on set up etc. Several times the media have insinuated that he is technically better than Hamilton, that he can give more precise feedback and that they trust him more from that perspective, I really would like something more concrete either way. For example the media also wank on about button's smooth tyre preserving skills but mclaren are on record as saying they don't see any difference between the two in terms of tyre usage,.

Taking the advice from the slower driver would be a very dangerous route (think that is what happened at Ferrari with Kimi) since there is reasons why a driver is fast. One of the reasons might be the ability to drive a car that is set up in such a way that it is on it's absolute limits. While Hamilton (for instance) can tame such a beast another driver might feel like he is on a rodeo.


#3904 fed up

fed up
  • Member

  • 1,953 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 13:39

Taking the advice from the slower driver would be a very dangerous route (think that is what happened at Ferrari with Kimi) since there is reasons why a driver is fast. One of the reasons might be the ability to drive a car that is set up in such a way that it is on it's absolute limits. While Hamilton (for instance) can tame such a beast another driver might feel like he is on a rodeo.


This..

It is a myth that Mclaren would trust Jenson - the slower driver - over Lewis. The car will not get faster by backing the slowest drive as you could effectivel waste resources to stand still.




#3905 tkulla

tkulla
  • Member

  • 3,141 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 28 April 2011 - 13:45

This..

It is a myth that Mclaren would trust Jenson - the slower driver - over Lewis. The car will not get faster by backing the slowest drive as you could effectivel waste resources to stand still.



There's a difference between development and setup. On development I'm sure they look for agreement among the drivers before continuing down a route. This is a smart way to be sure the new parts are working as you would expect.

With setup, it's fine for them to go different routes. But in their short history together, when they diverge it seems like it's Button who has the advantage. It would be interesting to see how they would fare against each other if they had no access to each others' data, kind of like a Pedrosa/Hayden kind of situation. My guess is that this would allow Button to beat Hamilton much more often. Of course, they team would suffer and they might be battling for 6th instead of podiums if they did that...

#3906 gricey1981

gricey1981
  • Member

  • 1,177 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 28 April 2011 - 13:50

There's a difference between development and setup. On development I'm sure they look for agreement among the drivers before continuing down a route. This is a smart way to be sure the new parts are working as you would expect.

With setup, it's fine for them to go different routes. But in their short history together, when they diverge it seems like it's Button who has the advantage. It would be interesting to see how they would fare against each other if they had no access to each others' data, kind of like a Pedrosa/Hayden kind of situation. My guess is that this would allow Button to beat Hamilton much more often. Of course, they team would suffer and they might be battling for 6th instead of podiums if they did that...


I dunno man. Lewis managed to beat fred with not much set up help.

Also he won the WDC with Heikki as a partner. I dont think Heikki was setting it up for him.

#3907 Hairpin

Hairpin
  • Member

  • 4,468 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 28 April 2011 - 13:53

I dunno man. Lewis managed to beat fred with not much set up help.

Also he won the WDC with Heikki as a partner. I dont think Heikki was setting it up for him.

Very true. I think all of them know what they want and how to get it. Problem arises when no setup changes gives you the behavior you want. Then it is up to development team to go to the drawing board. This is when they should take the advice from the faster driver.

Edited by Hairpin, 28 April 2011 - 13:54.


#3908 tkulla

tkulla
  • Member

  • 3,141 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 28 April 2011 - 14:02

I dunno man. Lewis managed to beat fred with not much set up help.

Also he won the WDC with Heikki as a partner. I dont think Heikki was setting it up for him.


It would be interesting to know if the rumors about Alonso preventing the sharing of his data with Hamilton were true. If so, that would make the fact that Alonso beat Hamilton in 6 of the last 9 races relevant to this discussion. Of course, we'll probably never know that either.

And Heikki most certainly was treated as a #2 to Hamilton, at least after their relative performance was obvious. I'm sure they had him doing some donkey work at times.


#3909 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,018 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 14:03

There's a difference between development and setup. On development I'm sure they look for agreement among the drivers before continuing down a route. This is a smart way to be sure the new parts are working as you would expect.

With setup, it's fine for them to go different routes. But in their short history together, when they diverge it seems like it's Button who has the advantage. It would be interesting to see how they would fare against each other if they had no access to each others' data, kind of like a Pedrosa/Hayden kind of situation. My guess is that this would allow Button to beat Hamilton much more often. Of course, they team would suffer and they might be battling for 6th instead of podiums if they did that...


Based on? Just monza?

As to your guess, that's kind of my point, that seems to be most people's guesses but I don't understand where it's coming from.

He managed fine as a rookie after initially slipping back from alonso once he stopped sharing set up info. Also lewis's recent interview where he talked about his understanding of the car etc suggests he'd be fine, although I don't know if anyone else has expressed this opinion (of lewis's technical ability' or just him.

#3910 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,018 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 14:05

It would be interesting to know if the rumors about Alonso preventing the sharing of his data with Hamilton were true. If so, that would make the fact that Alonso beat Hamilton in 6 of the last 9 races relevant to this discussion. Of course, we'll probably never know that either.

And Heikki most certainly was treated as a #2 to Hamilton, at least after their relative performance was obvious. I'm sure they had him doing some donkey work at times.


Well china would hardly stand as an alonso set up victory and nor would brazil...

He slipped back initially and then lewis spent plenty of time studying data with his engineer to understand why, found the issue and was then right back on alonso's pace (and beyond).

#3911 bauss

bauss
  • Member

  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 14:05

There's a difference between development and setup. On development I'm sure they look for agreement among the drivers before continuing down a route. This is a smart way to be sure the new parts are working as you would expect.

With setup, it's fine for them to go different routes. But in their short history together, when they diverge it seems like it's Button who has the advantage. It would be interesting to see how they would fare against each other if they had no access to each others' data, kind of like a Pedrosa/Hayden kind of situation. My guess is that this would allow Button to beat Hamilton much more often. Of course, they team would suffer and they might be battling for 6th instead of podiums if they did that...


Actually, I think Jenson will suffer more if that were the case.... he is the one who needs the car to be set up just right innit. Feedback from both drivers testing different things on Friday is key to getting this right on Saturday.

If everyone was doing their own thing, they will be covering half the data they are now...

We know Lewis The Driving God gets on pace quicker in FP and even he came out and categorically said he has relatively been able to dial in his car quickly compared to teammates.

A prime example of this was Silverstone last year where Friday was wasted on the EBD and Pafett had to fly home to the simulator to work on Saturday setup.

They had only FP3 to fine tune the car on track...we all know what happened in qualifying.



#3912 gricey1981

gricey1981
  • Member

  • 1,177 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 28 April 2011 - 14:10

Well china would hardly stand as an alonso set up victory and nor would brazil...

He slipped back initially and then lewis spent plenty of time studying data with his engineer to understand why, found the issue and was then right back on alonso's pace (and beyond).



Exactly, if you take out China and Brazil where I believe he did infact out qualify Fred both times. Then they were back to being pretty even which they had been all season.

#3913 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,018 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 14:30

Actually, I think Jenson will suffer more if that were the case.... he is the one who needs the car to be set up just right innit. Feedback from both drivers testing different things on Friday is key to getting this right on Saturday.
If everyone was doing their own thing, they will be covering half the data they are now...

We know Lewis The Driving God gets on pace quicker in FP and even he came out and categorically said he has relatively been able to dial in his car quickly compared to teammates.

A prime example of this was Silverstone last year where Friday was wasted on the EBD and Pafett had to fly home to the simulator to work on Saturday setup.

They had only FP3 to fine tune the car on track...we all know what happened in qualifying.


I guess it depends on whether that's true or whether button could get there on his own whilst hamilton wouldn't be able to.

Personally I think they'd both be fine.

#3914 fed up

fed up
  • Member

  • 1,953 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 14:38

Based on? Just monza?

As to your guess, that's kind of my point, that seems to be most people's guesses but I don't understand where it's coming from.


It's a myth.

People only care when Jenson beats Lewis and attributes it to set up - the rest of the time when lewis beats Jenson - be it because of set up or just because he is faster, it is expected, so doesn't make headline news.

Unless Lewis absolutely thrashes Jenson people will argue that they are close - some will even argue that Jenson has the upper hand. It is wrong of course, but one has to indulge them.


#3915 bauss

bauss
  • Member

  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 14:38

I guess it depends on whether that's true or whether button could get there on his own whilst hamilton wouldn't be able to.

Personally I think they'd both be fine.


Basically, It means there will be more weekends with both driving a suboptimally setup car, Lewis TDG will overall cope better with those.

#3916 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,018 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 14:41

Basically, It means there will be more weekends with both driving a suboptimally setup car, Lewis TDG will overall cope better with those.


I get that but, if it was true that button is a whizz at set up and lewis useless then button's car will be less 'sub optimal' than hamilton's so the argument doesn't necessarily hold.

#3917 bauss

bauss
  • Member

  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 14:45

I get that but, if it was true that button is a whizz at set up and lewis useless then button's car will be less 'sub optimal' than hamilton's so the argument doesn't necessarily hold.


indeed ...butwe know that aint true, Button was never thought of as a setup whizz until he had a DG as teammate and media had to find a way to make them look equal.

#3918 Grenada

Grenada
  • Member

  • 3,066 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 14:53

It would be interesting to know if the rumors about Alonso preventing the sharing of his data with Hamilton were true. If so, that would make the fact that Alonso beat Hamilton in 6 of the last 9 races relevant to this discussion. Of course, we'll probably never know that either.

And Heikki most certainly was treated as a #2 to Hamilton, at least after their relative performance was obvious. I'm sure they had him doing some donkey work at times.



Crikey man, he was a rookie in 2007. Would you expect Pastor Maldonado to be a set up expert?

#3919 Grenada

Grenada
  • Member

  • 3,066 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 14:56

indeed ...butwe know that aint true, Button was never thought of as a setup whizz until he had a DG as teammate and media had to find a way to make them look equal.



For a minute, I was racking my brains to work out who DG was. :lol:

Advertisement

#3920 gricey1981

gricey1981
  • Member

  • 1,177 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:02

For a minute, I was racking my brains to work out who DG was. :lol:


:) Should be obvious as after all there can be only one! :)

#3921 tkulla

tkulla
  • Member

  • 3,141 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:03

Let's keep in mind that we're back to the days of setup being about the race and not about qualifying. We saw that in the last two races - in China Lewis found a better balance for the race than Jenson, while in Malaysia the opposite was true (once Jenson got enough DF on the front wing). Everyone is still finding their feet with these tyres so we're going to see some fluctuations, but already I think we've seen Lewis take the Prost route in China by setting his car up more for the race than for qualifying.

#3922 Grenada

Grenada
  • Member

  • 3,066 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:09

Let's keep in mind that we're back to the days of setup being about the race and not about qualifying. We saw that in the last two races - in China Lewis found a better balance for the race than Jenson, while in Malaysia the opposite was true (once Jenson got enough DF on the front wing). Everyone is still finding their feet with these tyres so we're going to see some fluctuations, but already I think we've seen Lewis take the Prost route in China by setting his car up more for the race than for qualifying.



Hamilton's problem in Malaysia was not set up according to him (who I believe more than any so-called pundit/expert/F1 journalist), it was because they gave him the wrong tyres on one stint - he wanted soft and not the hard ones. I guess the soft ones he wanted were less "destroyed" than the hard ones he was given. We haven't heard much about this other than Hamilton's interview because F1 journalism doesn't dig deep about such matterd when it is easier to go to the "Hamilton made a mistake re. tyres/set up" default mode.

#3923 tkulla

tkulla
  • Member

  • 3,141 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:14

Hamilton's problem in Malaysia was not set up according to him (who I believe more than any so-called pundit/expert/F1 journalist), it was because they gave him the wrong tyres on one stint - he wanted soft and not the hard ones. I guess the soft ones he wanted were less "destroyed" than the hard ones he was given. We haven't heard much about this other than Hamilton's interview because F1 journalism doesn't dig deep about such matterd when it is easier to go to the "Hamilton made a mistake re. tyres/set up" default mode.


I call BS on that one. Plain and simple, his car wasn't set up for the harder tyres, and so his pace on those tyres was nowhere near as quick as Jenson's. Sure, he had the one bad set, but the truth is he wasn't quick on any set of the hard tyres.

#3924 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,823 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:14

:) Should be obvious as after all there can be only one! :)


Well that depends on if you're into polytheism or monotheism
I'm of course the latter, but lets not get discriminatory ;)

Edited by Kvothe, 28 April 2011 - 15:17.


#3925 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,018 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:15

Let's keep in mind that we're back to the days of setup being about the race and not about qualifying. We saw that in the last two races - in China Lewis found a better balance for the race than Jenson, while in Malaysia the opposite was true (once Jenson got enough DF on the front wing). Everyone is still finding their feet with these tyres so we're going to see some fluctuations, but already I think we've seen Lewis take the Prost route in China by setting his car up more for the race than for qualifying.


He always has, or at least he's on record as saying he did that whilst kovi set it up more for qualifying in 2008/9.

#3926 Grenada

Grenada
  • Member

  • 3,066 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:16

I call BS on that one. Plain and simple, his car wasn't set up for the harder tyres, and so his pace on those tyres was nowhere near as quick as Jenson's. Sure, he had the one bad set, but the truth is he wasn't quick on any set of the hard tyres.


I believe him - I doubt he would say such a thing if it wasn't true, especially as he had a full week of thinking about it and probably discussing it with his engineers and the team.

#3927 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,018 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:16

I call BS on that one. Plain and simple, his car wasn't set up for the harder tyres, and so his pace on those tyres was nowhere near as quick as Jenson's. Sure, he had the one bad set, but the truth is he wasn't quick on any set of the hard tyres.


Well if he wanted the softs then the problem of not being set up for the hards would obviously have been a lot less...particularly if he got one of the other two sets rather than the bad set.

#3928 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,823 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:16

I call BS on that one. Plain and simple, his car wasn't set up for the harder tyres, and so his pace on those tyres was nowhere near as quick as Jenson's. Sure, he had the one bad set, but the truth is he wasn't quick on any set of the hard tyres.


You're wrong, his pace was fine on the first set of hards, and was comparable to both Vettel and Button on the softs. His time also improved on the last stint of hards.

#3929 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:21

Hamilton's problem in Malaysia was not set up according to him (who I believe more than any so-called pundit/expert/F1 journalist), it was because they gave him the wrong tyres on one stint - he wanted soft and not the hard ones. I guess the soft ones he wanted were less "destroyed" than the hard ones he was given. We haven't heard much about this other than Hamilton's interview because F1 journalism doesn't dig deep about such matterd when it is easier to go to the "Hamilton made a mistake re. tyres/set up" default mode.


His first stint of the (fresh) hard tyres was, nonetheless, not great.
That might well have been due to the car being setup with qualifying and the soft tyre in mind and expecting to be using three sets of options in the race.


#3930 bauss

bauss
  • Member

  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:25

I call BS on that one. Plain and simple, his car wasn't set up for the harder tyres, and so his pace on those tyres was nowhere near as quick as Jenson's. Sure, he had the one bad set, but the truth is he wasn't quick on any set of the hard tyres.


I call BS on this one. Plain and simple, if you look at his stint time on the new set of hard tires...they were ok, only slightly slower than Jenson at that point who was on soft tires which are supposedly 1 sec faster (and less than a second slower than Vettel on the softs also).
It was with the 2nd set where everything went south and he couldnt even match the times he was doing on the first set (with heavier fuel).



#3931 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,897 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:35

There's a difference between development and setup. On development I'm sure they look for agreement among the drivers before continuing down a route. This is a smart way to be sure the new parts are working as you would expect.

With setup, it's fine for them to go different routes. But in their short history together, when they diverge it seems like it's Button who has the advantage. It would be interesting to see how they would fare against each other if they had no access to each others' data, kind of like a Pedrosa/Hayden kind of situation. My guess is that this would allow Button to beat Hamilton much more often. Of course, they team would suffer and they might be battling for 6th instead of podiums if they did that...


In 2010 the new parts more often than not did not work.
One of the problems IMHO was the eternal quest for balance from a certain driver.
While balance certainly is important, ultimate pace is what counts which involves some risks (like witnessed in previous years), so sometimes if you want to be the best you gotta suck it up and wrestle the b*i*t*c*h. On the other hand, if you're just focused on beating the driving god then ...

And please, they diverged once in Monza, can we really draw conclusions from one race, which is different than all the other tracks in the calendar?


#3932 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:40

I call BS on this one. Plain and simple, if you look at his stint time on the new set of hard tires...they were ok, only slightly slower than Jenson at that point who was on soft tires which are supposedly 1 sec faster (and less than a second slower than Vettel on the softs also).
It was with the 2nd set where everything went south and he couldnt even match the times he was doing on the first set (with heavier fuel).


Button was 1.0 to 1.5 seconds behind Hamilton for pretty much the whole stint.
Alonso closed up on both of them.
The stint only lasted 13 laps for Hamilton, why?


#3933 bauss

bauss
  • Member

  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:48

Button was 1.0 to 1.5 seconds behind Hamilton for pretty much the whole stint.
Alonso closed up on both of them.
The stint only lasted 13 laps for Hamilton, why?


because Mclaren kept screwing him up (ultimately) by trying to go for the undercut.

They did the same on his 2nd soft tire stint.


Alonso was 5 secs behind Lewis at the start of the stint, and 5 secs behind at the start of the final lap in the stint...so no Alonso didnt close up on him. And Alonso was on the softer tire right?

http://www.f1matrix.it/gp_2011_eng/

Edited by bauss, 28 April 2011 - 15:48.


#3934 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,823 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 15:50

because Mclaren kept screwing him up (ultimately) by trying to go for the undercut.

They did the same on his 2nd soft tire stint.


Alonso was 5 secs behind Lewis at the start of the stint, and 5 secs behind at the start of the final lap in the stint...so no Alonso didnt close up on him. And Alonso was on the softer tire right?

http://www.f1matrix.it/gp_2011_eng/


Plus i'm sure he was behind Petrov for several laps, which we know has an effect on tyres. I remember TDG (as described by DC) doing a very tasty move on the Rudderless one. While Petrov had pitted by the time Jenson closed.

Edited by Kvothe, 28 April 2011 - 15:51.


#3935 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 28 April 2011 - 16:02

because Mclaren kept screwing him up (ultimately) by trying to go for the undercut.

They did the same on his 2nd soft tire stint.


Alonso was 5 secs behind Lewis at the start of the stint, and 5 secs behind at the start of the final lap in the stint...so no Alonso didnt close up on him. And Alonso was on the softer tire right?

http://www.f1matrix.it/gp_2011_eng/


So McLaren took a perfectly fine set of tyres off the car after 13 laps with a full 20 laps to go in the race knowing that they would be replaced with a set of used primes?
Hamilton's times had dropped from being consistently in the 1:42's to 1:43.1 on lap 35 and 1:43.6 on lap 36, he then pitted on lap 37. The tyres were quite clearly going off, no?

Fwiw, I fully agree that they pitted too early at the end of the second stint.



#3936 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,218 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 16:14

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?


Hmm, tricky. Probably around 25%, but that's a real guess, I was trying to avoid putting a figure on it :)

#3937 whambham

whambham
  • New Member

  • 3 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 28 April 2011 - 16:43

Button is a great driver and has his place in history, as the only driver who had a rocket while others raced with a moped. :lol:

#3938 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 28 April 2011 - 16:47

Button is a great driver and has his place in history, as the only driver who had a rocket while others raced with a moped. :lol:


Welcome to the forum, looks like you will fit in this thread quite nicely!


#3939 ImDDAA

ImDDAA
  • Member

  • 3,226 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 19:20

There's a difference between development and setup. On development I'm sure they look for agreement among the drivers before continuing down a route. This is a smart way to be sure the new parts are working as you would expect.

With setup, it's fine for them to go different routes. But in their short history together, when they diverge it seems like it's Button who has the advantage. It would be interesting to see how they would fare against each other if they had no access to each others' data, kind of like a Pedrosa/Hayden kind of situation. My guess is that this would allow Button to beat Hamilton much more often. Of course, they team would suffer and they might be battling for 6th instead of podiums if they did that...


I've read so many posts where people have said 'if things were like this then Jenson would beat Hamilton much more often'. Interesting, there appears to be loads of parameters where Jenson would excell and Hamilton dwindle, including all the new regs for this season, I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Your point about them diverging on set up - can you give examples of the times they went in different directions and how this effected their quali and race pace? The one that sticks in my mind is Monza where Hamiltons loose lap in Q3 masked his real pace - he matched or beat Button in Q1 and Q2 then went backwards in Q3. Of course we didn't see his race pace, but on that evidence there isn't a strong case either way.

Advertisement

#3940 ImDDAA

ImDDAA
  • Member

  • 3,226 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 19:27

I believe him - I doubt he would say such a thing if it wasn't true, especially as he had a full week of thinking about it and probably discussing it with his engineers and the team.


Plus his poor pace on the other primes has been exaggerated: he dropped an average of 0.5 seconds per lap to Vettel on his first set of primes while Vettel was on softs and in a faster car - doesn't seem bad at all to me.

#3941 ImDDAA

ImDDAA
  • Member

  • 3,226 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 19:31

Just to clarify - I don't think Hamiltons pace was fantastic on the primes at all during Malaysia, but his first and last set really weren't that terrible, certainly not bad enough to destroy his race in the way the second set of primes did.

#3942 bonjon1979a

bonjon1979a
  • Member

  • 3,203 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 20:07

Button is a great driver and has his place in history, as the only driver who had a rocket while others raced with a moped. :lol:


What was his team mate driving?

#3943 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 28 April 2011 - 20:11

Just to clarify - I don't think Hamiltons pace was fantastic on the primes at all during Malaysia, but his first and last set really weren't that terrible, certainly not bad enough to destroy his race in the way the second set of primes did.


Pace over those first 10 laps was OK, I agree. It is the fact that the stint only lasted 13 laps that was the problem.
There is a clear drop-off on the 11th and 12th laps of the stint.

A fresh set of tyres used when approx half of the fuel has been burned off should be lasting considerably longer than the used set he started the race with.

#3944 hotstickyslick

hotstickyslick
  • Member

  • 3,389 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 20:18

Pace over those first 10 laps was OK, I agree. It is the fact that the stint only lasted 13 laps that was the problem.
There is a clear drop-off on the 11th and 12th laps of the stint.

A fresh set of tyres used when approx half of the fuel has been burned off should be lasting considerably longer than the used set he started the race with.

The hard tyre is useless. Assuming you can get it to last as long if not longer than the softer tyre, you're still losing at least half a second a lap in comparison to the softs. Most of the time the hard tyre slides too much anyway and it degrades quicker than the softs.

#3945 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 28 April 2011 - 20:38

The hard tyre is useless. Assuming you can get it to last as long if not longer than the softer tyre, you're still losing at least half a second a lap in comparison to the softs. Most of the time the hard tyre slides too much anyway and it degrades quicker than the softs.


It worked OK for Button in Malaysia and it worked OK for Hamilton in China.
Yes, slower than the harder tyre but not useless and certainly able to last longer than the soft based on the evidence of the three races so far but that is with the caveat that they tend to be used when the fuel load is much lighter.

I appreciate that Hamilton was on the harder tyre much earlier than he intended to be in Malaysia and that this is most likely the main reason for the high degradation (Webber only got 9 decent laps out of his new set on heavy fuel in China).

Edited by Dunder, 28 April 2011 - 20:40.


#3946 ImDDAA

ImDDAA
  • Member

  • 3,226 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 20:39

Pace over those first 10 laps was OK, I agree. It is the fact that the stint only lasted 13 laps that was the problem.
There is a clear drop-off on the 11th and 12th laps of the stint.

A fresh set of tyres used when approx half of the fuel has been burned off should be lasting considerably longer than the used set he started the race with.


I agree, none of the stints seemed long enough to me though.

Did anyone else use the primes when their tanks were that full?

#3947 ImDDAA

ImDDAA
  • Member

  • 3,226 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 20:41

It worked OK for Button in Malaysia and it worked OK for Hamilton in China.
Yes, slower than the harder tyre but not useless and certainly able to last longer than the soft based on the evidence of the three races so far but that is with the caveat that they tend to be used when the fuel load is much lighter.

I appreciate that Hamilton was on the harder tyre much earlier than he intended to be in Malaysia and that this is most likely the main reason for the high degradation (Webber only got 9 decent laps out of his new set on heavy fuel in China).


Button went onto the primes when he was lighter than Hamilton but there's no doubt they worked better for him than Lewis in Malaysia.

#3948 hotstickyslick

hotstickyslick
  • Member

  • 3,389 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 20:47

It worked OK for Button in Malaysia and it worked OK for Hamilton in China.
Yes, slower than the harder tyre but not useless and certainly able to last longer than the soft based on the evidence of the three races so far but that is with the caveat that they tend to be used when the fuel load is much lighter.

I appreciate that Hamilton was on the harder tyre much earlier than he intended to be in Malaysia and that this is most likely the main reason for the high degradation (Webber only got 9 decent laps out of his new set on heavy fuel in China).

It doesn't work okay, it is excrement in doughnut form. The only reason it's used is because it's mandatory. Look at Webber in China on them - absolutely hopeless. They are pretty much worse than the softer tyre in every way.

#3949 Rocket73

Rocket73
  • Member

  • 1,463 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 April 2011 - 21:49

Button went onto the primes when he was lighter than Hamilton but there's no doubt they worked better for him than Lewis in Malaysia.


and the opposite in china. jenson usually happier on the primes but he had no pace at the end of the race in china. set up is critical for tyre wear this year

#3950 ZooL

ZooL
  • Member

  • 2,063 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 28 April 2011 - 22:42

I call BS on that one. Plain and simple, his car wasn't set up for the harder tyres, and so his pace on those tyres was nowhere near as quick as Jenson's. Sure, he had the one bad set, but the truth is he wasn't quick on any set of the hard tyres.

His first set of hards he was setting similar times as JB who was on softs...that was incredible considering the soft is around 1sec per lap faster...