Jump to content


Photo

2012 Jenson vs Lewis scorecard


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
4041 replies to this topic

#2901 fieraku

fieraku
  • Member

  • 5,304 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 25 April 2012 - 22:00

According to quite a few LH supporters, the 'randomness' is more down to McLaren's sloppy strategies and pit work, cause without that LH would have won 3 races, or somehing like that.

;)


Hamilton has lost 1 position on track in 4races,you can do the rest of the math. ;)

One

Advertisement

#2902 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,179 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 25 April 2012 - 22:38

Hamilton has lost 1 position on track in 4races,you can do the rest of the math.;)

One


Shame that this doesn't mean a thing in this age of bubblegum tyres which don't allow any racing... :)

#2903 fieraku

fieraku
  • Member

  • 5,304 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 25 April 2012 - 22:47

Shame that this doesn't mean a thing in this age of bubblegum tyres which don't allow any racing... :)


It does about the comment you made.Hamilton has lost 1 position on track by himself...McLaren have lost him what 10-12 positions?
So it shouldn't surprise you when Ham fans claim he should have won 2 or 3,he's been impeccable thus far. ;)

#2904 FeintToPass

FeintToPass
  • New Member

  • 2 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 26 April 2012 - 09:31

But let me repeat the obvious again. Button only appears on-par with Hamilton, because of the tyres.

Yet Button fans delude themselves with the notion that “the tyre whisperer” has somehow found extra pace. Quite frankly it just doesn't happen. :lol:

#2905 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,316 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 26 April 2012 - 10:51

Makes sense, relative to me I probably don't feel jb's performance was better than Lewis's in the race by the same amount as you (although I do think it was better) and I'm crediting the penalty with more of an effect which would be why I think the two balance out whereas your seesaw comes down on the side of JB. Gareth presumably a bit further the other way on both counts so his seesaw comes down on Lewis's side (although maybe your post will have had some effect...!)

I guess a seesaw isn't a bad way of looking at it (had to google it though :) ). And I did hope my post would have an effect in some way indeed. I mean, come on!

#2906 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,179 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 26 April 2012 - 10:53

Yet Button fans delude themselves with the notion that “the tyre whisperer” has somehow found extra pace. Quite frankly it just doesn't happen. :lol:


I wouldn't say he has found extra pace either. Rather that he's always been pretty close, sometimes level or even ahead, which was just masked by two things: a) the belief before 2010 that Hamilton is at least half a second faster than boring Button (or any other driver for that matter) and b) Button acclimatising himself to team and car in 2010 which sometimes (but not always) made the gap appear as big as expected from a).

Since Button has truly settled at McLaren, he's been as fast as Hamilton in the races but lacks a bit of speed over one lap, something which he has likely done all his career. This whole smokescreen of blaming the tyres always was and remains just that: a smokescreen. The uncomfortable (to some) truth points to Hamilton and Button being very closely matched F1 drivers.

Edited by as65p, 26 April 2012 - 10:53.


#2907 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,813 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 26 April 2012 - 10:56

I wouldn't say he has found extra pace either. Rather that he's always been pretty close, sometimes level or even ahead, which was just masked by two things: a) the belief before 2010 that Hamilton is at least half a second faster than boring Button (or any other driver for that matter) and b) Button acclimatising himself to team and car in 2010 which sometimes (but not always) made the gap appear as big as expected from a).

Since Button has truly settled at McLaren, he's been as fast as Hamilton in the races but lacks a bit of speed over one lap, something which he has likely done all his career. This whole smokescreen of blaming the tyres always was and remains just that: a smokescreen. The uncomfortable (to some) truth points to Hamilton and Button being very closely matched F1 drivers.


Make that Hamilton, Button and Alonso all being closely matched drivers, Button after all has beaten Lewis over a season, something Alonso was unable to do.

Edited by Kvothe, 26 April 2012 - 10:56.


#2908 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,179 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 26 April 2012 - 10:58

Make that Hamilton, Button and Alonso all being closely matched drivers, Button after all has beaten Lewis over a season, something Alonso was unable to do.


If you need that for comfort, be my guest! This is, however, the Jenson vs. Lewis scorecard... :wave:  ;)

#2909 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,813 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 26 April 2012 - 11:00

If you need that for comfort, be my guest! This is, however, the Jenson vs. Lewis scorecard... :wave: ;)


Oh of course, I just thought I'd take your point to its logical conclusion.

#2910 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,179 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 26 April 2012 - 11:13

Oh of course, I just thought I'd take your point to its logical conclusion.


Sure. :D

#2911 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,017 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 26 April 2012 - 11:16

Sure. :D


Be interesting to see them in a refuelling era.

JB didn't do too badly in his last refuelling season mind!

#2912 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,179 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 26 April 2012 - 11:19

Be interesting to see them in a refuelling era.


Or on Michelins... :cat:

#2913 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,017 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 26 April 2012 - 11:30

Or on Michelins... :cat:


Yep - particularly if they could both have tyres made to their own specification!

Read something in a thread about the tyres Schumi had versus the other bridgestone teams that really made me think...

#2914 skid solo

skid solo
  • Member

  • 2,117 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:00

I wouldn't say he has found extra pace either. Rather that he's always been pretty close, sometimes level or even ahead, which was just masked by two things: a) the belief before 2010 that Hamilton is at least half a second faster than boring Button (or any other driver for that matter) and b) Button acclimatising himself to team and car in 2010 which sometimes (but not always) made the gap appear as big as expected from a).

Since Button has truly settled at McLaren, he's been as fast as Hamilton in the races but lacks a bit of speed over one lap, something which he has likely done all his career. This whole smokescreen of blaming the tyres always was and remains just that: a smokescreen. The uncomfortable (to some) truth points to Hamilton and Button being very closely matched F1 drivers.


Under the current regs Button is very close to Hamilton as a race driver but still behind as a qualifier. As qualification is a test of ultimate speed then Hamilton has proved he is faster. Maybe not half a second but on average probably 2-3/10ths. Under the current regs a driver enters qualification knowing they have to conserve tyres in the back of their mind. It has become all about tyre management to the extent people deliberately don't run in qualification because they know they lose 3/10ths of performance for every lap they do on a set of tyres.
The issue of tyres isn't a smokescreen it's a modern day F1 reality and when Schumacher came out and publicly slated them, I applauded him because in modern F1 there are a lot of good drivers looking excellent and a lot of excellent drivers looking good.

#2915 sofarapartguy

sofarapartguy
  • Member

  • 1,008 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:11

After reading a couple of pages I think it is good that people are still finding Button as average, slow and useless. That will bring even more fun watching them trying to find new unbelievable excuses when Button beats Ham again this year.

Edited by sofarapartguy, 26 April 2012 - 12:12.


#2916 hammibal

hammibal
  • Member

  • 1,857 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:28

I wouldn't say he has found extra pace either. Rather that he's always been pretty close, sometimes level or even ahead, which was just masked by two things: a) the belief before 2010 that Hamilton is at least half a second faster than boring Button (or any other driver for that matter) and b) Button acclimatising himself to team and car in 2010 which sometimes (but not always) made the gap appear as big as expected from a).

Since Button has truly settled at McLaren, he's been as fast as Hamilton in the races but lacks a bit of speed over one lap, something which he has likely done all his career. This whole smokescreen of blaming the tyres always was and remains just that: a smokescreen. The uncomfortable (to some) truth points to Hamilton and Button being very closely matched F1 drivers.

Well Lewis is still clearly quicker than Jenson over one lap but of course the biggest difference between 2010 and now is the different tyres and having to drive to a delta time which obviously suits Jenson's mentality rather than Lewis's although there are signs now that Lewis is coming to terms with that better.

Or on Michelins... :cat:

You think that Lewis would have not been able to drive on Michelins? :confused:

#2917 engel

engel
  • Member

  • 5,037 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:29

Well Lewis is still clearly quicker than Jenson over one lap but of course the biggest difference between 2010 and now is the different tyres and having to drive to a delta time which obviously suits Jenson's mentality rather than Lewis's although there are signs now that Lewis is coming to terms with that better.


Drivers have to drive to a delta? This thread never fails to deliver ...

#2918 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,316 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:32

I'm glad rob asked and very glad you answered. Really enjoyed reading that, thanks for taking the time to pop it all down.

A couple of points where I think we perhaps differ:

1. I think putting the qualy down to "luck" on the basis that there are not many times per season when conditions will change so much in a 10 minute period is harsh. The fact is that is going to happen, that saving your tyres in earlier sessions will give you an advantage in doing this and that qualifying with less laps/sets of tyres used in Q1 and Q2 has been a fairly (IMO, without looking at the data) consistant advantage for Hamilton over Button (I remember a few races last year where Hamilton had an extra run in Q3 or started the race with an extra set of fresh tyres). To me it's more than just luck for Hamilton, it's him making good use of his better performance in Q1 and Q2.

2. In the first stint my impression was that Hamilton was getting held up by Raikkonen who was getting held up by Button who may have been getting held up by Schumacher. Given that, I think it's more than possible that had Hamilton started and gotten away in 2nd, he'd have opened up more of a gap than you put him down for in that first stint. Which in turn reduces the traffic he potentially has to navigate later in the race, and gives more flexibility on the timing of his stops.

3. I agree Button navigated the traffic better, but significantly better enough to say he would have passed Hamilton on track?

Overall, did Jenson drive better on Sunday? I absolutely think so. Was he that much better that he could have overcome a 3 place, 0.5s, disadvantage in qualifying (that I think was fairly earned, notwithstanding Whitmarsh's comments)? When I entered this thread, my feeling was "no" with a sufficient degree of certainty to say "I'll score that one for Lewis". As I mentioned before, though, from what you and others have said that feeling of certainty has definitely decreased enough for me to say "draw".


You're welcome. And on the three points:

1. I didn't really put it down to luck, I mentioned that there was an element of luck involved. And that even though I said I 'could claim' this, I found it going a bit too far. Actually I didn't want to go too much into this point, but I read it in one of your other posts and I wanted to react to it.

2. It's a tough call, but you conclude quite a lot based on your impression. I don't agree with this impression, because A) Schumacher and Button for most laps had no DRS, B) Hamilton had DRS every lap, C) Button over the course of the stint could not keep up with Schumacher, D) Hamilton over the course of the second stint could not keep up with Button, why would he be able to drive away from Schumacher in the first stint?

3. Not sure what the question is about as I never claimed anywhere that Button would have been able to overtake Hamilton on track. It's too difficult to speculate because obviously in normal conditions I don't expect it, but because Hamilton was struggling to get through traffic as he was and from time to time even Webber launched an attack on him, you can't really rule it out. It's circumstances that cannot be predicted with the information we have. I did say that had Button had the grid penalty and Hamilton the 6,5 seconds lost through the last pitstop, I would expect Button to finish in front.

Not trying to change anyone's opinion anymore though, if people see this race as a draw I merely see it as slightly delusional. Just kidding, it's fine with me. :p There's a long season ahead and in the past 1 race hasn't decided this scorecard.

#2919 hammibal

hammibal
  • Member

  • 1,857 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:35

Yep - particularly if they could both have tyres made to their own specification!

Read something in a thread about the tyres Schumi had versus the other bridgestone teams that really made me think...

I think if the drivers werent shackled by the tyres i know who i would put my money on and thats the driver thats 2 tenths quicker in out and out pace

After reading a couple of pages I think it is good that people are still finding Button as average, slow and useless. That will bring even more fun watching them trying to find new unbelievable excuses when Button beats Ham again this year.

I wouldnt be so confident after Jenson's struggles last time out, in races run with circumstances not beyond the drivers call Lewis would probably have beaten Jenson in 3 of the 4 races, qualifying being a big advantage for Lewis

Advertisement

#2920 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,316 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:36

Me too but binary like Gareth.

Not sure I'd disagree with your china scores...but a 1 point difference on a scale of 1-10 is very different to a binary system (ahem, although I suppose now I've included a draw it's not actuall binary!).

So I'm trying to figure out whether a draw in my system and a 8-7 in your system is reconcilable or whether it might destroy the matrix And the space time continium!

This is exactly why I'm against using a binary system for a scorecard and started using my own 2 years ago. It's simply hardly ever really fair to judge them with the binary system. I'm not judging a weekend by who beat whom, but by who beat whom with what performance difference.

#2921 skid solo

skid solo
  • Member

  • 2,117 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:36

Drivers have to drive to a delta? This thread never fails to deliver ...


Where have you been?

#2922 hammibal

hammibal
  • Member

  • 1,857 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:38

Drivers have to drive to a delta? This thread never fails to deliver ...

Enlighten me

#2923 engel

engel
  • Member

  • 5,037 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:39

Where have you been?


As qualification is a test of ultimate speed


In a planet were Trulli had epic quali speed but crap race speed. Ohwaitaminute. That's earth.

#2924 hammibal

hammibal
  • Member

  • 1,857 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:43

In a planet were Trulli had epic quali speed but crap race speed. Ohwaitaminute. That's earth.

Trulli wasnt as good on worn tyres and was quite useless in the wet relatively speaking so his skill set was a bit limited

Edit: Also today we are talking about Pirelli's, if there was a tyre war these kind of tyres would be next to useless, theyre tyres merely to improve the show

Edited by hammibal, 26 April 2012 - 12:52.


#2925 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,316 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:45

AUS - agree
MAS - 5 seems generous to me: crash was his fault, and put him out of the points, then there were the tyre problems (which I am sure would have been laid at LH's door if things were the other way round). Go with a 4.
CHN - I'd go with 8 for each
BHR - I'd say the difference in performance was enough for a 2 point gap (it was certainly a bigger gulf in performance than we saw in AUS IMO), although not sure whether to increase LH 1 or decrease JB 1. Probably decrease JB 1.

So I'd end up with 6.75 vs 8 if I was using a "score out of 10 for the weekend" approach.

Looks about right, but i would have given JB a 10 for Aus because he was just untouchable.

I understand both comments, perhaps I should have been more clear about the ratings I give.

While it seems as a 1-10 system, in fact I've only ever really used ratings from 5 to 9. So there's basically 5 levels. Why that is, well I don't know exactly, but I started utilizing it this way and found out the logic behind it later. 5 is sup-par already and I generally don't really think either of them really sucked that bad without there being some sort of reason for it that they couldn't do much about. And even for seemingly perfect victories I find it difficult to give a rating of a 10, because I feel that wins are easily overrated and Jenson in Melbourne didn't necessarily perform better then in lets say India 2011.

#2926 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,017 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:49

This is exactly why I'm against using a binary system for a scorecard and started using my own 2 years ago. It's simply hardly ever really fair to judge them with the binary system. I'm not judging a weekend by who beat whom, but by who beat whom with what performance difference.


Different I would say, not more or less fair. It's less absolute and allows for degrees of out performance but on the other hand it's even more subjective than a binary system. Why 8 rather than 9 or 7, why one point better than lewis rather than 2...if you see what I mean.

For looking at degrees of relative performance I quite like the points table but with obvious team errors/mechanicals accounted for - e.g. lewis gets 18 points for barcelona 2010. Mind you trying to account for the penalty in china would be fun, giving lewis 18 points and jenson 15 might raise some hackles! :p



#2927 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,017 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:54

I understand both comments, perhaps I should have been more clear about the ratings I give.

While it seems as a 1-10 system, in fact I've only ever really used ratings from 5 to 9. So there's basically 5 levels. Why that is, well I don't know exactly, but I started utilizing it this way and found out the logic behind it later. 5 is sup-par already and I generally don't really think either of them really sucked that bad without there being some sort of reason for it that they couldn't do much about. And even for seemingly perfect victories I find it difficult to give a rating of a 10, because I feel that wins are easily overrated and Jenson in Melbourne didn't necessarily perform better then in lets say India 2011.


Just going on from my last post, 1-10 ratings rarely do use below 5.

I wonder if a boxing system, where the winner gets 10 and the loser gets 9 unless the difference was huge in which case they got 8, would give less bandwidth for performance differences (i.e. not having 10 ratings to choose from) but still give more than a binary system, or alternatively and out of 3 rating.

Just musing.

Incidentally, I don't think button should get 1 10 for oz purely because he was out qualified by his teammate and then got past thanks to the lewis's clutch setting. He also had the best car (along with lewis). I think he'd have probably won anyway and he had great pace but 10 should be reserved for perfect or something extra special

#2928 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,316 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 26 April 2012 - 12:59

Different I would say, not more or less fair. It's less absolute and allows for degrees of out performance but on the other hand it's even more subjective than a binary system. Why 8 rather than 9 or 7, why one point better than lewis rather than 2...if you see what I mean.

Gut feeling combined with the ability to remain objective even though there is clear support for one of the drivers. I feel I can do this well, but nobody is perfect.

For looking at degrees of relative performance I quite like the points table but with obvious team errors/mechanicals accounted for - e.g. lewis gets 18 points for barcelona 2010. Mind you trying to account for the penalty in china would be fun, giving lewis 18 points and jenson 15 might raise some hackles! :p

My ratings can also take these circumstances into account, yet it's not solely about points they get in the end. For Barcelona 2010 I have LH 9, JB 7. Degree of relative performance. Jenson scored more points since they are teammates yet I have a higher rating for Lewis in the same period (7.7, 7.5).

Edited by Lights, 26 April 2012 - 13:00.


#2929 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,017 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 26 April 2012 - 13:11

Gut feeling combined with the ability to remain objective even though there is clear support for one of the drivers. I feel I can do this well, but nobody is perfect.


My ratings can also take these circumstances into account, yet it's not solely about points they get in the end. For Barcelona 2010 I have LH 9, JB 7. Degree of relative performance. Jenson scored more points since they are teammates yet I have a higher rating for Lewis in the same period (7.7, 7.5).


Wohoo Lewis is better!!! :p

Hmmmm, maybe a) you are quite good at scoring after all and b) the method I would suggested would also work well.

I haven't worked this backwards at all, just took their points and added for lewis - 18 barcelona 2010, 12 hungary 2010, 10 bahrain 2012, for button 12 for silverstone 2011, 10 for bahrain (I know, I know they both couldn't have finished 5th!).

Gives 556 v 549 to lewis over button so button has 98.7% of lewis's points. Your ratings he has 97.4%...pretty close!

They were just the major ones I could remember off the top of my head, sure there is more, need to swap lewis and jenson in japan 2010 for instance and I'm far more likely to remember lewis issues than jenson's!

I do like the idea of having to place the driver in the position they 'deserved' to be in each race, opens a whole new can of worms for this thread!






#2930 ocp

ocp
  • Member

  • 143 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 26 April 2012 - 13:18

http://youtu.be/ae6GdU544S8?t=55m32s

Found this interesting and wanted to share.

#2931 GlenP

GlenP
  • Member

  • 3,377 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 26 April 2012 - 13:21

Laughing at those poor simplistic fools that think that if Hamilton is one or two tenths quicker on a quali lap he would be quicker each and every lap of a 60 lap race if he weren't tyre limited! Quite frankly, you haven't a clue if you think its as straightforward as that. There are small inconveniences such as consistency and reliability, racecraft and judgement - being able to turn one lap on does not mean he can do the same for another 59 laps without making a mistake.

F1 is not a one lap formula, regardless of tyres.

#2932 The Ragged Edge

The Ragged Edge
  • Member

  • 4,435 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 26 April 2012 - 13:34

This forum as well as most motorsport forums is still in a state of flux, after the reality of the Pirelli tyres had to be spelt out to the 99%. :rolleyes: Only then did it dawn on them and become apparent, that racing in 2012 was fake/racing to a delta/contrived/tyres cant be push for more than 2-3 laps at most, post Schumacher and Rosberg comments. :rotfl: Really? Really? In the world of the blind, it really is true that the one-eyed man is king. What I find tragic is they are basically the same characteristics of the 2011 Pirelli. The only difference is for 2012 Pirelli, went softer on the compounds and incorporated the ultra small peak tyre performance window.

Why the "EUREKA" moment post Schumacher/Rosberg comment for the 99%? Couldn't people see the glaringly obvious for themselves? The sad thing is, even I questioned my sanity at times, due to the amount of people denying the obvious. There is no real racing, this year or last year, bar a few laps at any given circuits. I mentioned incessantly that lap times do not come down commensurate with fuel load, but it must be the comprehensive school system, churning out young adults where their synaptic pathways don't actually connect in high numbers, why this passed over the heads of most. This one simple fact should have set off alarm bells. Alas it confirmed to me, why the plebs are the plebs.

I said after the first race of this season, chasing down large time gaps with these tyres(if the tyres are in the same condition) is impossible and got derided by the usual suspects, telling me I had it wrong. There has been no racing bar a tyre management exercise and it clearly favours some drivers over others. This year in particular, it has manifested itself in making good drivers look great, and great drivers looking good. After winning the 2012 Australian GP, John Button gave an interview and the crux of what he said was that his son acknowledged he was really good on these tyres. Yet hardly anybody deciphered what he actually meant, but to me it was obvious.. All future discussion about each respective drivers race pace, is null and void, because it is not a true representation due to the limiting factors of the tyres.

Edited by The Ragged Edge, 26 April 2012 - 13:37.


#2933 GlenP

GlenP
  • Member

  • 3,377 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 26 April 2012 - 13:38

.. All future discussion about each respective drivers race pace, is null and void, because it is not a true representation due to the limiting factors of the tyres.

Oh well, if you've made a decree then we'll all just have to go along with that then.

If car performance was limited to tyres team-mates would come in in pairs. But they don't.

Discussion about relative driver performance is not null and void - tyres are part of it, but can't be all of it.

#2934 sofarapartguy

sofarapartguy
  • Member

  • 1,008 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 26 April 2012 - 13:38

Laughing at those poor simplistic fools that think that if Hamilton is one or two tenths quicker on a quali lap he would be quicker each and every lap of a 60 lap race if he weren't tyre limited! Quite frankly, you haven't a clue if you think its as straightforward as that. There are small inconveniences such as consistency and reliability, racecraft and judgement - being able to turn one lap on does not mean he can do the same for another 59 laps without making a mistake.

F1 is not a one lap formula, regardless of tyres.


:up:

I must add that slightly unbalanced car gives better possibility to extract these 1-2 tenth driving above the limit, locking tyres hard and powersliding on the exits. But any driver just physically can't do it lap after lap over the race distance. And that is when the consistency and nice smooth race set-up comes into play.




#2935 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,316 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 26 April 2012 - 13:46

Wohoo Lewis is better!!! :p

Hmmmm, maybe a) you are quite good at scoring after all and b) the method I would suggested would also work well.

I haven't worked this backwards at all, just took their points and added for lewis - 18 barcelona 2010, 12 hungary 2010, 10 bahrain 2012, for button 12 for silverstone 2011, 10 for bahrain (I know, I know they both couldn't have finished 5th!).

Gives 556 v 549 to lewis over button so button has 98.7% of lewis's points. Your ratings he has 97.4%...pretty close!

They were just the major ones I could remember off the top of my head, sure there is more, need to swap lewis and jenson in japan 2010 for instance and I'm far more likely to remember lewis issues than jenson's!

I do like the idea of having to place the driver in the position they 'deserved' to be in each race, opens a whole new can of worms for this thread!

Yup, he's been better. And with my method it's pretty difficult for Jenson to get in front again, as it is now Lewis would need like 3 shocking weekends in a row.

And yes, perhaps that method could work as well. With both methods the trick is to take everything in consideration and not just one (albeit crucial) moment.

#2936 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,017 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 26 April 2012 - 13:51

:up:

I must add that slightly unbalanced car gives better possibility to extract these 1-2 tenth driving above the limit, locking tyres hard and powersliding on the exits. But any driver just physically can't do it lap after lap over the race distance. And that is when the consistency and nice smooth race set-up comes into play.


Not just the driver, drivers have been asked for several quali laps in a row before, but these tyres wouldn't take kindly to it, particularly anyone utilising loose rear end.

#2937 The Ragged Edge

The Ragged Edge
  • Member

  • 4,435 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 26 April 2012 - 13:57

Oh well, if you've made a decree then we'll all just have to go along with that then.

If car performance was limited to tyres team-mates would come in in pairs. But they don't.

Discussion about relative driver performance is not null and void - tyres are part of it, but can't be all of it.



Must everything be broken down into its constituent parts, for you to be able to understand? Jesus Christ, man. :rolleyes:


#2938 jjcale

jjcale
  • Member

  • 7,274 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 26 April 2012 - 14:12

This forum as well as most motorsport forums is still in a state of flux, after the reality of the Pirelli tyres had to be spelt out to the 99%. :rolleyes: Only then did it dawn on them and become apparent, that racing in 2012 was fake/racing to a delta/contrived/tyres cant be push for more than 2-3 laps at most, post Schumacher and Rosberg comments. :rotfl: Really? Really? In the world of the blind, it really is true that the one-eyed man is king. What I find tragic is they are basically the same characteristics of the 2011 Pirelli. The only difference is for 2012 Pirelli, went softer on the compounds and incorporated the ultra small peak tyre performance window.

Why the "EUREKA" moment post Schumacher/Rosberg comment for the 99%? Couldn't people see the glaringly obvious for themselves? The sad thing is, even I questioned my sanity at times, due to the amount of people denying the obvious. There is no real racing, this year or last year, bar a few laps at any given circuits. I mentioned incessantly that lap times do not come down commensurate with fuel load, but it must be the comprehensive school system, churning out young adults where their synaptic pathways don't actually connect in high numbers, why this passed over the heads of most. This one simple fact should have set off alarm bells. Alas it confirmed to me, why the plebs are the plebs.

I said after the first race of this season, chasing down large time gaps with these tyres(if the tyres are in the same condition) is impossible and got derided by the usual suspects, telling me I had it wrong. There has been no racing bar a tyre management exercise and it clearly favours some drivers over others. This year in particular, it has manifested itself in making good drivers look great, and great drivers looking good. After winning the 2012 Australian GP, John Button gave an interview and the crux of what he said was that his son acknowledged he was really good on these tyres. Yet hardly anybody deciphered what he actually meant, but to me it was obvious.. All future discussion about each respective drivers race pace, is null and void, because it is not a true representation due to the limiting factors of the tyres.


Epic post... on so many levels.

What amazed/concerned me most was last year (and even this year) people insisted on doing detailed lap time comparisons to support their arguments.

.. but we must not forget that tyre management (and, in the old days, engine conservation) has always been a part of F1... I dont have a problem with drivers not being able to drive balls out all the time... that is also artificial and it existed for only a relatively short time in F1.

For the purposes of this thread... what bothers me most is that LH has not managed to get a better handle on what is needed to be more competitive (versus JB) on race day... as much as I hate to say/see it, he needs to change his style even more. SV and JB are IMO quicker than him in equal cars over a race distance on these tyres.. and knowing how things used to be when tyres were not such a limiting factor, I find this most annoying.

Edited by jjcale, 26 April 2012 - 15:36.


#2939 skid solo

skid solo
  • Member

  • 2,117 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 26 April 2012 - 14:16

This forum as well as most motorsport forums is still in a state of flux, after the reality of the Pirelli tyres had to be spelt out to the 99%. :rolleyes: Only then did it dawn on them and become apparent, that racing in 2012 was fake/racing to a delta/contrived/tyres cant be push for more than 2-3 laps at most, post Schumacher and Rosberg comments. :rotfl: Really? Really? In the world of the blind, it really is true that the one-eyed man is king. What I find tragic is they are basically the same characteristics of the 2011 Pirelli. The only difference is for 2012 Pirelli, went softer on the compounds and incorporated the ultra small peak tyre performance window.

Why the "EUREKA" moment post Schumacher/Rosberg comment for the 99%? Couldn't people see the glaringly obvious for themselves? The sad thing is, even I questioned my sanity at times, due to the amount of people denying the obvious. There is no real racing, this year or last year, bar a few laps at any given circuits. I mentioned incessantly that lap times do not come down commensurate with fuel load, but it must be the comprehensive school system, churning out young adults where their synaptic pathways don't actually connect in high numbers, why this passed over the heads of most. This one simple fact should have set off alarm bells. Alas it confirmed to me, why the plebs are the plebs.

I said after the first race of this season, chasing down large time gaps with these tyres(if the tyres are in the same condition) is impossible and got derided by the usual suspects, telling me I had it wrong. There has been no racing bar a tyre management exercise and it clearly favours some drivers over others. This year in particular, it has manifested itself in making good drivers look great, and great drivers looking good. After winning the 2012 Australian GP, John Button gave an interview and the crux of what he said was that his son acknowledged he was really good on these tyres. Yet hardly anybody deciphered what he actually meant, but to me it was obvious.. All future discussion about each respective drivers race pace, is null and void, because it is not a true representation due to the limiting factors of the tyres.


Here here :up: But then I was privately educated :)


Advertisement

#2940 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 26 April 2012 - 14:35

Here here :up: But then I was privately educated :)

How much did that cost?

#2941 fieraku

fieraku
  • Member

  • 5,304 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 26 April 2012 - 14:39

I wouldn't say he has found extra pace either. Rather that he's always been pretty close, sometimes level or even ahead, which was just masked by two things: a) the belief before 2010 that Hamilton is at least half a second faster than boring Button (or any other driver for that matter) and b) Button acclimatising himself to team and car in 2010 which sometimes (but not always) made the gap appear as big as expected from a).

Since Button has truly settled at McLaren, he's been as fast as Hamilton in the races but lacks a bit of speed over one lap, something which he has likely done all his career. This whole smokescreen of blaming the tyres always was and remains just that: a smokescreen. The uncomfortable (to some) truth points to Hamilton and Button being very closely matched F1 drivers.


True,but I'll go back to my last years argument with a lot of Button fans who thought I was making excuses.

In the races tires didn't require caring/managing and were durable 'enough' JB was nowhere near,and when I made the argument that they weren't pushing but were going within a "DELTA"...yes I was the very first one to suggest it ;) or saw it,JB fans called it BS conspiracy theories.And when I argued TRUE PACE,same thing.


Self explenatory, the 2011 pirellis did not allow a driver to drive fast for as long as he wished but had to stay within a delta,
so it can only hurt the faster driver as he can do nothing about it because it's beyond his control.We can safely suggest who the faster driver is.

Good point,I also think the incredible reliability we had this year is an effect of cars not being pushed anywhere near the limit due to this conservative(turtle pace) driving to save the tires. Every race I felt that the drivers never pushed hard enough.

Schu agrees,finally someone does.

You can throw race pace out the window.2010 was more representative of their differences and Ham was winning that battle comfortably.Q ahead most of the time,finish ahead as well.

#2942 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,316 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 26 April 2012 - 14:42

How much did that cost?

:D

#2943 hammibal

hammibal
  • Member

  • 1,857 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 26 April 2012 - 14:51

Laughing at those poor simplistic fools that think that if Hamilton is one or two tenths quicker on a quali lap he would be quicker each and every lap of a 60 lap race if he weren't tyre limited! Quite frankly, you haven't a clue if you think its as straightforward as that. There are small inconveniences such as consistency and reliability, racecraft and judgement - being able to turn one lap on does not mean he can do the same for another 59 laps without making a mistake.

F1 is not a one lap formula, regardless of tyres.

He was in 2010 when he wasnt tyre limited

#2944 fieraku

fieraku
  • Member

  • 5,304 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 26 April 2012 - 14:53

Laughing at those poor simplistic fools that think that if Hamilton is one or two tenths quicker on a quali lap he would be quicker each and every lap of a 60 lap race if he weren't tyre limited! Quite frankly, you haven't a clue if you think its as straightforward as that. There are small inconveniences such as consistency and reliability, racecraft and judgement - being able to turn one lap on does not mean he can do the same for another 59 laps without making a mistake.

F1 is not a one lap formula, regardless of tyres.


Pirelli to introduce ‘super hard’ tyre in Barcelona


2 3 Lewis Hamilton McLaren-Mercedes 66 +0.6 secs 3
3 4 Jenson Button McLaren-Mercedes 66 +35.6 secs

http://en.mclarenf-1.....Jenson Button

With Vettel holding him up. DO pray Pirelli doesn't bring such tire back,or it will get ugly.

#2945 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,179 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 26 April 2012 - 15:05

True,but I'll go back to my last years argument with a lot of Button fans who thought I was making excuses.

In the races tires didn't require caring/managing and were durable 'enough' JB was nowhere near,and when I made the argument that they weren't pushing but were going within a "DELTA"...yes I was the very first one to suggest it ;) or saw it,JB fans called it BS conspiracy theories.And when I argued TRUE PACE,same thing.


Yeah, 'delta' is already the buzzword of the season, now even becoming DELTA! :drunk: Well, for the losers anyway....

Schu agrees,finally someone does.


Yeah. Sad sight. TBH, I have a growing admiration for Hamilton not getting down that road, at least not yet. Or probably he's just realizing the basic idiocy the argument "I'm not better than the rest because the game is too easy"? :D

You can throw race pace out the window.2010 was more representative of their differences and Ham was winning that battle comfortably.Q ahead most of the time,finish ahead as well.


2010 was Buttons first year in the team, and even on now mythically everlasting Bridgestones Hamilton didn't beat him half as convincing as predicted. Since then the tyre excuse has come in handy for those still mourning that disappointment, and the even bigger one a year later. Really, life isn't fair :cry: On the bright side, there's always at least one more excuse in the barrel than things life can throw at you. :p

#2946 fieraku

fieraku
  • Member

  • 5,304 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 26 April 2012 - 15:27

Yeah, 'delta' is already the buzzword of the season, now even becoming DELTA! :drunk: Well, for the losers anyway....





2010 was Buttons first year in the team, and even on now mythically everlasting Bridgestones Hamilton didn't beat him half as convincing as predicted. Since then the tyre excuse has come in handy for those still mourning that disappointment, and the even bigger one a year later.


Yeah it's all a conspiracy :stoned: which Hembrey never disagreed to btw ;)

So what it was his 1st year? MW bent over backwards to make him feel at home,and JB wasn't some rookie but the incumbent WDC who Ham did not beat convincingly but rather easily without trouble or so it seemed.

I wonder what you'll say when your idol calls it how it is :lol: Another excuse perhaps?


#2947 skid solo

skid solo
  • Member

  • 2,117 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 26 April 2012 - 15:31

How much did that cost?


Piss off or I'll report you to the mods  ;)

#2948 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,017 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 26 April 2012 - 15:33

2010 was Buttons first year in the team, and even on now mythically everlasting Bridgestones Hamilton didn't beat him half as convincing as predicted. Since then the tyre excuse has come in handy for those still mourning that disappointment, and the even bigger one a year later. Really, life isn't fair :cry: On the bright side, there's always at least one more excuse in the barrel than things life can throw at you. :p


There was a lot of talk about racecraft and strategy in this thread in 2010.

I think it was accepted that year that lewis had the edge on pace, which is why whether pit stop calls were down to the driver or team became a hot topic.

Now that might be down to JB being new to the team, not having the seat fitted correctly etc, it might have been down to the tyres versus last year or it might have been a bit of both or some other factor.

But I think it's clear there is a difference in their relative race pace in 2010 compared to 2011/12.

#2949 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 26 April 2012 - 15:44

There was a lot of talk about racecraft and strategy in this thread in 2010.

I think it was accepted that year that lewis had the edge on pace, which is why whether pit stop calls were down to the driver or team became a hot topic.

Now that might be down to JB being new to the team, not having the seat fitted correctly etc, it might have been down to the tyres versus last year or it might have been a bit of both or some other factor.

But I think it's clear there is a difference in their relative race pace in 2010 compared to 2011/12.


There was also the matter of the 2010 Bridgestones being relatively weaker at the front. That would, logically, favour Hamilton relative to Button (when compared to the current tyres).

There is no question that faster degrading tyres masks differentials in terms of race pace. Not just between team mates but between the cars too. All throughout last year, midfield cars were closer to the leading cars in race conditions than they were in the race, likewise the backmarkers were closer to both.

The fact that there are differentials at all though makes a nonsense of the "driving to a delta" line of argument. If the Red Bulls and McLarens were poodling around 2 seconds slower than the car was capable of, why were the Force Indias and Williams not able to keep up?


#2950 bauss

bauss
  • Member

  • 4,961 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 26 April 2012 - 15:48

This forum as well as most motorsport forums is still in a state of flux, after the reality of the Pirelli tyres had to be spelt out to the 99%. :rolleyes: Only then did it dawn on them and become apparent, that racing in 2012 was fake/racing to a delta/contrived/tyres cant be push for more than 2-3 laps at most, post Schumacher and Rosberg comments. :rotfl: Really? Really? In the world of the blind, it really is true that the one-eyed man is king. What I find tragic is they are basically the same characteristics of the 2011 Pirelli. The only difference is for 2012 Pirelli, went softer on the compounds and incorporated the ultra small peak tyre performance window.

Why the "EUREKA" moment post Schumacher/Rosberg comment for the 99%? Couldn't people see the glaringly obvious for themselves? The sad thing is, even I questioned my sanity at times, due to the amount of people denying the obvious. There is no real racing, this year or last year, bar a few laps at any given circuits. I mentioned incessantly that lap times do not come down commensurate with fuel load, but it must be the comprehensive school system, churning out young adults where their synaptic pathways don't actually connect in high numbers, why this passed over the heads of most. This one simple fact should have set off alarm bells. Alas it confirmed to me, why the plebs are the plebs.

I said after the first race of this season, chasing down large time gaps with these tyres(if the tyres are in the same condition) is impossible and got derided by the usual suspects, telling me I had it wrong. There has been no racing bar a tyre management exercise and it clearly favours some drivers over others. This year in particular, it has manifested itself in making good drivers look great, and great drivers looking good. After winning the 2012 Australian GP, John Button gave an interview and the crux of what he said was that his son acknowledged he was really good on these tyres. Yet hardly anybody deciphered what he actually meant, but to me it was obvious.. All future discussion about each respective drivers race pace, is null and void, because it is not a true representation due to the limiting factors of the tyres.


I pretty much agree with this

even after Bahrain where Lewis looked quicker in the race and a Lewis fan should be pleased, the whole thing just seems so hollow and contrived. You know their pace is all very much tire limited. Much more than I can ever remember...

the pace is either determinant on who gets clear air all stint, who lucks into the perfect setup for the race day temps, who copes better with a wrong setup (because of temps and unpredictable tires), who conserves tires better etc etc.

It's all tire dependent this and that....sure some of those skills are nice to have and should be utilized in normal GP racing but should it really be the end-all be-all to differentiate top drivers?

It's like having Yohan Blake, Usain Bolt and co to run 1500m or forcing them to jog 150m in a 200m race and using those results to determine the fastest man in the world. Or like another analogy someone wrote in this whole Pirelli silly business, giving tennis players degradable rackets so that the harder you hit the worse the rackets get and you gotta be gentle with them to last the whole match. Sure it will make the results of Grand Slams etc more fun and Djokovic and co probably won't dominate as much but really, isn't that bullsh*t?
That's exactly what we have in F1 now, having sprint drivers become some form of endurance racers, pancake-Pirelli whisperers to reduce the chances of one team/driver dominating and to improve the show. Sure more casual fans may enjoy this but comeon this is no real F1. I mean, when 24 hour cars are driven more flatout than 2-hour F1 cars, it is clear we got a serious issue.

As far as these two are concerned, both are top drivers...for those that doubted b4 the pairing, it was confirmed in 2010. They are both good enough racers that, unlike the Massas and such, their race performances and speed exceed the artificial limit given by these tires. This thread is supposed to be an argument about the final extra, buts its apparent alot of that final extra will never be displayed or be of use in this formula. Their race pace will continue to be very close and see-saw up and down all based on what is going on with the tires at any given point. Its become clear alot of the argument about this and that has become moot.

Whoever wins this scorecard will be down to consistency, luck (reliability, pitstops, strategy etc) and qualifying performance. Ham has the slight advantage because he seems to have one of those well covered and his head in the right place (which gives consistency, mind you its not that hard when you arent been pushed to the limit in races - chances of a Monza 2009 are greatly reduced so as a matter of fact, even "consistency" in the new formula is hollow) but any victory by him will still be hollow because it is not determined by what should be the primary factor in grand prix racing - Drivers racing and battling at the speed and limit of their abilities and cars.
Not some lower artificial limit imposed by tires engineered to do just that - bunch everyone together, create unpredictability and "improve the show". The sport itself suffers greatly for this.

Edited by bauss, 26 April 2012 - 15:59.