Jump to content


Photo

Jenson vs Lewis - 2012 Scorecard - Part III


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
3870 replies to this topic

#2101 thesham01

thesham01
  • Member

  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:16

Well, there are people who like making up lists and others that don't.


You keep saying that. Yet we keep telling you we are only counting pitstops and car failures, quantifiable stuff.

You know what, I'm going to try and make a list, and post it here for all to discuss. Gonna take a while, but leave it with me.



Advertisement

#2102 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:20

I:

Button 637 points in 56 races.

Hamilton 632 points in 56 races.

=

So a 5 points differences after 56 races is practically nill. While Lewis might have left the stronger impression due to his 2012 campaign after the bad 2011 season both drivers scored overall as equals.


You

nonsense...nuff said


Facts, which make no sense to you :lol:

Edited by H2H, 06 November 2012 - 20:23.


#2103 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:23

Facts, which make no sense to you :lol:


Yeah, facts such as 'luck tends to even itself out', good one.

#2104 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,482 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:29

Yeah, facts such as 'luck tends to even itself out', good one.


If 3 years doesn't tell a story, then a 1 year championship must be pretty meaningless. So a WDC means FA really, right?

#2105 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:37

Yeah, facts such as 'luck tends to even itself out', good one.


Over 56 occasions/races it tends indeed to even itself out. Not perfectly but there is a strong tendency.

The points earned in those gives us a good base rate which acts as an anchor. It helps to counteract bias as seen so often in fanboys. An educated guess might result in a better outcome but one has to be careful not to go too far.

Quite elementar stuff, really. But of course some like to ignore it and to state wild things. Amusing but not exactly close to reality.

@Lazy made the point neatly clear.

Edited by H2H, 06 November 2012 - 20:38.


#2106 thesham01

thesham01
  • Member

  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:38

If 3 years doesn't tell a story, then a 1 year championship must be pretty meaningless. So a WDC means FA really, right?


You keep trying to hide behind meaningless expression and cliches.

First of all, the 3 year period they have been together has told the full story, more or less. It is as obvious as the sun in the sky what the story is.

However, what doesn't tell the full story is the points total. Anyone bar the hardcore Button fans in this thread can see the difference in quality and performance between them.

Unfortunately some fans don't like/want to accept certain facts. Ye seem to like judging books by their covers.





#2107 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:38

If 3 years doesn't tell a story, then a 1 year championship must be pretty meaningless. So a WDC means FA really, right?


Sorry, but assuming you at least believe in the laws of this universe, then it wouldn't need explained to you that luck doesn't even itself out, even if they have 100 years together.

#2108 thesham01

thesham01
  • Member

  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:40

Over 56 occasions/races it tends indeed to even itself out. Not perfectly but there is a strong tendency.

The points earned in those gives us a good base rate which acts as an anchor. It helps to counteract bias as seen so often in fanboys. An educated guess might result in a better outcome but one has to be careful not to go too far.

Quite elementar stuff, really. But of course some like to ignore it and to state wild things. Amusing but not exactly close to reality.


Nice to know we have an expert on luck and the universe among us. You're a Professor of some type of physics I presume; cosmology?

I'd love to hear the evidence behind your statement. Which I presume you do have, right?

#2109 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:46

Over 56 occasions/races it tends indeed to even itself out. Not perfectly but there is a strong tendency.

The points earned in those gives us a good base rate which acts as an anchor. It helps to counteract bias as seen so often in fanboys. An educated guess might result in a better outcome but one has to be careful not to go too far.

Quite elementar stuff, really. But of course some like to ignore it and to state wild things. Amusing but not exactly close to reality.


Ironic coming from a Vettel fan, who's lost innumerably more points than Webber through no fault of his own since 2010. Did luck even itself out with them? No. Did luck even itself out with LH and JB? No. What do you base this assumption on that it will, Karma?

#2110 gricey1981

gricey1981
  • Member

  • 1,180 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:48



they are equal on points but thats about it..

Hamiltons had by far the worst luck.

should have won 3 more races this year which would put it at 11 wins - 7, which is probably a fairer comparison.

He has been trounced in qually which fair enough is only bragging rights but still.
Button has impressed though and done better than I thought!

Edited by gricey1981, 06 November 2012 - 20:49.


#2111 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,482 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:50

You keep trying to hide behind meaningless expression and cliches.

First of all, the 3 year period they have been together has told the full story, more or less. It is as obvious as the sun in the sky what the story is.

However, what doesn't tell the full story is the points total. Anyone bar the hardcore Button fans in this thread can see the difference in quality and performance between them.

Unfortunately some fans don't like/want to accept certain facts. Ye seem to like judging books by their covers.



Sorry, but assuming you at least believe in the laws of this universe, then it wouldn't need explained to you that luck doesn't even itself out, even if they have 100 years together.


So what they should really do is scrap the points system, have them drive round a bit at a few circuits, and then get you guys to judge who was the best. That would be the only fair way really.

#2112 Burtros

Burtros
  • Member

  • 1,024 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:53

:lol: I am Responding to your answers. thank you


No, you highlighted my opinion, asked some random questions and now we are here. For whats its actually worth.

Do you think someone on here can anser the question you asked me, which was asking what was to blame for Jenson struggling so much this year?

#2113 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:54

Ironic coming from a Vettel fan, who's lost innumerably more points than Webber through no fault of his own since 2010. Did luck even itself out with them? No. Did luck even itself out with LH and JB? No. What do you base this assumption on that it will, Karma?


Note the words 'tend' and 'not perfectly'. The impact of the bad luck of 2010 is a lot smaller in the scoreline of the almost 4 years as driver pairing. Something quite similar goes for Hamilton and Button.

Nice to know we have an expert on luck and the universe among us. You're a Professor of some type of physics I presume; cosmology?

I'd love to hear the evidence behind your statement. Which I presume you do have, right?


:lol:

So what exactly did you not understand?

It is obvious that your bias might not be happy with the outcome of the base rate with the intrinsic regression of the factor luck to the mean, but sadly those are the facts. The outcome is a very close scoreline for Button and Hamilton.

With that I will leave this thread, it was fun for a while.

Edited by H2H, 06 November 2012 - 20:59.


#2114 thesham01

thesham01
  • Member

  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:55

So what they should really do is scrap the points system, have them drive round a bit at a few circuits, and then get you guys to judge who was the best. That would be the only fair way really.


No. The points system is fine. (well its clearly not a perfect way of telling who deserves something, but I have no problem with it staying how it is)

You however use it to show that Button is an equal of Hamilton. We are trying to show you why that logic is flawed.

Nice attempt at a strawman though.

#2115 Burtros

Burtros
  • Member

  • 1,024 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:57

they are equal on points but thats about it..

Hamiltons had by far the worst luck.

should have won 3 more races this year which would put it at 11 wins - 7, which is probably a fairer comparison.

He has been trounced in qually which fair enough is only bragging rights but still.
Button has impressed though and done better than I thought!


I wouldnt argue with any of that fundamentally to be honest.




#2116 TurboF1

TurboF1
  • Member

  • 748 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:57

they are equal on points but thats about it..

Hamiltons had by far the worst luck.

should have won 3 more races this year which would put it at 11 wins - 7, which is probably a fairer comparison.

He has been trounced in qually which fair enough is only bragging rights but still.
Button has impressed though and done better than I thought!


Had a great run this year, didn't he? You must have thought he was utter shit if he's done better than you thought this year. He has his days, no doubt, but he seems to have way more "off" days, than "on" days if you've been paying attention.

#2117 Burtros

Burtros
  • Member

  • 1,024 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:58

You keep saying that. Yet we keep telling you we are only counting pitstops and car failures, quantifiable stuff.

You know what, I'm going to try and make a list, and post it here for all to discuss. Gonna take a while, but leave it with me.


If your making a list, be a sweetie and make one detailing unforced errors while you are at it :)

#2118 jjcale

jjcale
  • Member

  • 7,290 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:58

So what they should really do is scrap the points system, have them drive round a bit at a few circuits, and then get you guys to judge who was the best. That would be the only fair way really.


Er... that's the point of the scorecard thread... No?

#2119 thesham01

thesham01
  • Member

  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 20:58

:lol:

So what exactly did you not understand?

It is obvious that your bias might not be happy with the outcome of the base rate with the intrinsic regression of the factor luck to the mean, but sadly those are the facts. The outcome is a very close scoreline for Button and Hamilton.

With that I will leave this thread, it was fun for a while.



Of course you are leaving, how handy for you... after trying to blind us with basic statistical methods of course (I deal with them everyday, my job being research).



Advertisement

#2120 thesham01

thesham01
  • Member

  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:01

If your making a list, be a sweetie and make one detailing unforced errors while you are at it :)



I'm currently at Monaco 2010, and it will only include non-fault DNF's and pitstop errors. Anything that can anyway be related to the driver I am leaving out.

Its not going to be perfect as there will be some things I'll have missed, which is why I'll genuinely want input from all of ye (yes, all) when I post it.

#2121 Burtros

Burtros
  • Member

  • 1,024 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:01

Had a great run this year, didn't he? You must have thought he was utter shit if he's done better than you thought this year. He has his days, no doubt, but he seems to have way more "off" days, than "on" days if you've been paying attention.


I thought it was quite clear he was referring to the whole 3 years, rather than this season alone.

Jensons been poor this year, but he was excellent last year. Hamiltons has been the same, just opposite was round if you ask me.



#2122 SennaJordan

SennaJordan
  • Member

  • 72 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:02

Hamilton was better than Button in 2010.
Button was better than Hamilton in 2011.
Hamilton was much better than Button in 2012.

Hamilton is the decisive and clear winner of this ''battle'', even though the points don't reflect this fact. However, Button did a lot better than most expected. So far, it's his career's biggest accomplishment.

#2123 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,877 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:02

Nice to know we have an expert on luck and the universe among us. You're a Professor of some type of physics I presume; cosmology?

I'd love to hear the evidence behind your statement. Which I presume you do have, right?

I believe there's a while field of mathematics based on it being the case... http://en.wikipedia....f_large_numbers

#2124 garoidb

garoidb
  • Member

  • 3,905 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:04

Hamilton is the decisive and clear winner of this ''battle'', even though the points don't reflect this fact. However, Button did a lot better than most expected. So far, it's his career's biggest accomplishment.


Only Hamilton fans would believe this.

#2125 Burtros

Burtros
  • Member

  • 1,024 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:07

I'm currently at Monaco 2010, and it will only include non-fault DNF's and pitstop errors. Anything that can anyway be related to the driver I am leaving out.

Its not going to be perfect as there will be some things I'll have missed, which is why I'll genuinely want input from all of ye (yes, all) when I post it.


Why are you leaving out errors by the drivers themseleves? Surely it'd be better to paint a picture of all the things that have cost the drivers points? I think the point is readily accepted that Hamilton has had more than his share of the bad luck. Far more interesting to see the full and balanced picture of why they have dropped points.

I would do it, only I dont really need the list to work out how those facts might skew things.




#2126 Burtros

Burtros
  • Member

  • 1,024 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:10

Hamilton was better than Button in 2010.
Button was better than Hamilton in 2011.
Hamilton was much better than Button in 2012.

Hamilton is the decisive and clear winner of this ''battle'', even though the points don't reflect this fact. However, Button did a lot better than most expected. So far, it's his career's biggest accomplishment.


I did hear Nico Rosberg saying he was putting all thoughts of the WDC behind him and concentrating on the actual big prize of beating Hamilton next year.

#2127 thesham01

thesham01
  • Member

  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:13

I believe there's a while field of mathematics based on it being the case... http://en.wikipedia....f_large_numbers



On that graph you'll notice that up to roll 400 it is varying, and not equal. We haven't reached 60 GP's yet.

You'll also be aware that rolling a dice is a very simplistic event, which is why they use it. Getting a racing driver across the line in a GP consists of many, many 'rolls of dice', meaning in the early stages when it is not equal (pre-400 in that graph), the inequality can differ even greater.

You'll also be aware that rolling a dice is an event that is unbiased and untouched by skill or weighting. Hamilton may have a bad mechanic, or group of them, causing his car to fail this year more than Buttons. Probability has nothing to do with that.

There are plenty more things I'm sure that back my point up that using rolling of one dice to say that Button and Hamilton are even in luck is complete and utter bollocks, but I can't be arsed thinking of them.

Edited by thesham01, 06 November 2012 - 21:17.


#2128 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,482 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:15

Er... that's the point of the scorecard thread... No?


Absolutely, but lets try and remember that's what it is, a few nerds having a bit of banter about the F1.

We're getting really ahead of ourselves if we going to put our opinion, based on a small percentage of the relative information, above the tried and tested judging system.

#2129 thesham01

thesham01
  • Member

  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:16

Why are you leaving out errors by the drivers themseleves? Surely it'd be better to paint a picture of all the things that have cost the drivers points? I think the point is readily accepted that Hamilton has had more than his share of the bad luck. Far more interesting to see the full and balanced picture of why they have dropped points.

I would do it, only I dont really need the list to work out how those facts might skew things.


Okay, well I will try, but I can't remember the races exactly and unless wikipedia doesn't mention it I won't know.

How about I do my best to include everything, and we all help in filling in the gaps after? Might as well try and sort this out before the year ends.

And enough with the cheek, I'm genuinely trying to sort it out, there is only one set of fans here trying to skew things and you know it.

#2130 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:17

Why are you leaving out errors by the drivers themseleves? Surely it'd be better to paint a picture of all the things that have cost the drivers points? I think the point is readily accepted that Hamilton has had more than his share of the bad luck. Far more interesting to see the full and balanced picture of why they have dropped points.

I would do it, only I dont really need the list to work out how those facts might skew things.


What's the point of doing that exactly?

#2131 jjcale

jjcale
  • Member

  • 7,290 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:17

On that graph you'll notice that up to roll 400 it is varying, and not equal. We haven't reached 60 GP's yet.

You'll also be aware that rolling a dice is a very simplistic event, which is why they use it. Getting a racing driver across the line in a GP consists of many, many 'rolls of dice', meaning in the early stages when it is not equal (pre-400 in that graph), the inequality can differ even greater.

You'll also be aware that rolling a dice is an event that unbiased and untouched by skill or weighting. Hamilton may have a bad mechanic, or group of them, causing his car to fail this year more than Buttons. Probability has nothing to do with that.

There are plenty more things I'm sure that back my point up that using rolling of one dice to say that Button and Hamilton are even in luck is complete and utter bollocks, but I can't be arsed thinking of them.


Why do we have to resort to theory when we can look at what has actually happened?

#2132 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,877 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:19

You'll notice in that page the graph. On that graph you'll notice that up to roll 400 it is varying, and not equal. We haven't reached 60 GP's yet.

You'll also be aware that rolling a dice is a very simplistic event, which is why they use it. Getting a racing driver across the line in a GP consists of many, many 'rolls of dice', meaning in the early stages when it is not equal (pre-400 in that graph), the inequality can differ even greater.

You'll also be aware that rolling a dice is an event that unbiased and untouched by skill or weighting. Hamilton may have a bad mechanic, or group of them, causing his car to fail this year more than Buttons. Probability has nothing to do with that.

There are plenty more things I'm sure that back my point up that using rolling of one dice to say that Button and Hamilton are even in luck is complete and utter bollocks, but I can't be arsed thinking of them.

You better tell the insurance companies then as they rely on this law applying to non-dice rolling events, if you can be arsed.

#2133 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,877 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:23

Why do we have to resort to theory when we can look at what has actually happened?

I thought that was the problem. The actual events aren't being looked at, they're being worked into some kind of perfect fantasy world where everything goes in Hamiltons favour.

#2134 thesham01

thesham01
  • Member

  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:23

You better tell the insurance companies then as they rely on this law applying to non-dice rolling events, if you can be arsed.


Of course they do, its the best method of figuring out their problems. They'd be silly not to use it.

The case of Hamiltons performance versus Buttons performance is a different case, for many reasons.

#2135 thesham01

thesham01
  • Member

  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:24

I thought that was the problem. The actual events aren't being looked at, they're being worked into some kind of perfect fantasy world where everything goes in Hamiltons favour.



We know they're not, thats the issue.

#2136 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:33

Absolutely, but lets try and remember that's what it is, a few nerds having a bit of banter about the F1.

We're getting really ahead of ourselves if we going to put our opinion, based on a small percentage of the relative information, above the tried and tested judging system.


Tried and testing judging system? So by your logic it's impossible to judge drivers based on anything other than points and championships, and yet you bother to post in this thread.

#2137 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,482 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:37

On that graph you'll notice that up to roll 400 it is varying, and not equal. We haven't reached 60 GP's yet.

You'll also be aware that rolling a dice is a very simplistic event, which is why they use it. Getting a racing driver across the line in a GP consists of many, many 'rolls of dice', meaning in the early stages when it is not equal (pre-400 in that graph), the inequality can differ even greater.

You'll also be aware that rolling a dice is an event that is unbiased and untouched by skill or weighting. Hamilton may have a bad mechanic, or group of them, causing his car to fail this year more than Buttons. Probability has nothing to do with that.

There are plenty more things I'm sure that back my point up that using rolling of one dice to say that Button and Hamilton are even in luck is complete and utter bollocks, but I can't be arsed thinking of them.


Most of those rolls of dice you/we have no clue about.

Your mechanic, for instance, you have no idea if thats true or not, and yet your making absolute statements based on that assumption. There could just as easily be an engineer on Jensons side who's got his maths fundamentally wrong and is consistently fking up Jensons set up.

The are endless variables you will never found out about.

There is a reason they use the points system, and that is because it is by far the most reliable way to judge who's done the best job. As opposed to a forum full of fanboys that is absolutely the worst, but surprise surprise the fanboys think they are better than the points.

#2138 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,482 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:39

Tried and testing judging system? So by your logic it's impossible to judge drivers based on anything other than points and championships, and yet you bother to post in this thread.


IT'S JUST FOR FUN FFS, it doesn't mean anything.

#2139 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:39

I thought that was the problem. The actual events aren't being looked at, they're being worked into some kind of perfect fantasy world where everything goes in Hamiltons favour.


So Hamilton didn't actually retire from the lead at Abu Dhabi and JB didn't actually gain a place?

Advertisement

#2140 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,877 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:41

Of course they do, its the best method of figuring out their problems. They'd be silly not to use it.

The case of Hamiltons performance versus Buttons performance is a different case, for many reasons.

I'd be interested in some more of those reasons because the ones you've mentioned so far seem to take bad luck out of the equation, which is what the last 5-zillion pages of this thread have been focused on.

#2141 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:44

IT'S JUST FOR FUN FFS, it doesn't mean anything.


Handy, just play the 'oh well it doesn't really matter anyway' card when your arguments fail.

#2142 StefanArak

StefanArak
  • Member

  • 249 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:45

Over 56 occasions/races it tends indeed to even itself out. Not perfectly but there is a strong tendency.

The points earned in those gives us a good base rate which acts as an anchor. It helps to counteract bias as seen so often in fanboys. An educated guess might result in a better outcome but one has to be careful not to go too far.

Quite elementar stuff, really. But of course some like to ignore it and to state wild things. Amusing but not exactly close to reality.

@Lazy made the point neatly clear.


60 is a tiny sample size for anything related to probability xD. Are you joking or being serious?

Edited by StefanArak, 06 November 2012 - 21:45.


#2143 thesham01

thesham01
  • Member

  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 21:47

I'd be interested in some more of those reasons because the ones you've mentioned so far seem to take bad luck out of the equation, which is what the last 5-zillion pages of this thread have been focused on.


The fact you think the rolling the dice experiment takes luck out of the equation tells me everything I need to know. Take a look at the graph on the linked wiki page for starters.

I'm just going to make this list, and we can discuss it then.

It would be nice to have an agreed upon list before we split. Or as close to agreed upon.

#2144 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,482 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 22:01

Handy, just play the 'oh well it doesn't really matter anyway' card when your arguments fail.


Answer me this, who would you trust to decide the WDC, the points or the guys in the ALonso thread?

#2145 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,877 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 06 November 2012 - 22:08

The fact you think the rolling the dice experiment takes luck out of the equation tells me everything I need to know.

As does your claim that you need to be a Professor of Cosmology to understand probability.

I'm just going to make this list, and we can discuss it then.

It would be nice to have an agreed upon list before we split. Or as close to agreed upon.

I admire your tenacity but to be honest I can't see anything close to agreement happening on this thread.



#2146 thesham01

thesham01
  • Member

  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 22:15

I admire your tenacity but to be honest I can't see anything close to agreement happening on this thread.


Probably not. But I'm going to go for it anyway.

2010 done :)

#2147 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,482 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 22:30

;)

Edited by Lazy, 06 November 2012 - 22:36.


#2148 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,064 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 06 November 2012 - 23:28

Most of those rolls of dice you/we have no clue about.

Your mechanic, for instance, you have no idea if thats true or not, and yet your making absolute statements based on that assumption. There could just as easily be an engineer on Jensons side who's got his maths fundamentally wrong and is consistently fking up Jensons set up.

The are endless variables you will never found out about.

There is a reason they use the points system, and that is because it is by far the most reliable way to judge who's done the best job. As opposed to a forum full of fanboys that is absolutely the worst, but surprise surprise the fanboys think they are better than the points.


It tells us which combination of driver and team have done the best job, undoubtedly.

#2149 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,064 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 06 November 2012 - 23:30

I'm currently at Monaco 2010, and it will only include non-fault DNF's and pitstop errors. Anything that can anyway be related to the driver I am leaving out.

Its not going to be perfect as there will be some things I'll have missed, which is why I'll genuinely want input from all of ye (yes, all) when I post it.


So barcelona this year stands as it is?


#2150 thesham01

thesham01
  • Member

  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 23:57

So barcelona this year stands as it is?


No, sorry, knew there would be something I would forget to explain. McLaren error is included.

So basically anything that is definitely not the drivers fault. Strategy out, and steward decisions out.