Jump to content


Photo

List of Hamilton's Lost 2012 Points [split]


  • Please log in to reply
191 replies to this topic

#101 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,646 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 05 November 2012 - 14:50

The point is that when he did so it was from higher positions than the others.

It's pointless (ahem) to try and attribute points to it, IMO, the best one could say is that he's not had a perfect season, but then who has?

Advertisement

#102 MirNyet

MirNyet
  • Member

  • 908 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 05 November 2012 - 14:51

These threads are very unproductive.. Yes Lewis has been unlucky this year (more so than others some could argue), but working out the lost points and everything is silly as it still doesn't change the fact that he was still unlucky and did not get the points.

I'm enjoying the end of the year and was glad to see some actual action on the track, next year is an opportunity to start afresh and we can stop whining about would have, should have, could haves!


Working out lost points is not silly - do you not think the driver himself will have done this and this could infact that have been a large part of his decision to go to Mercedes. Arguing over the lost points however is silly - they are gone as you say. You make your own luck as the saying goes - something is wrong in McLaren for these things to have happened - design/testing/set up/general house keeping can all be seen to be at fault in various ways for these faults. Driver generated failures of a fuel pump? Unlikely - short of putting it in a wall there is not much a driver can do to a fuel pump - the cars should be designed to take a lot of stuffing before something goes wrong.

In a sport where every point counts, and championships can be won or lost on a single point, the amount of points thrown away by McLaren - not the drivers in this case, the team in machinary or operational errors is shocking - just plain shocking - for a top team they are a joke. This should be looked at and not excused - McLaren as a team need to deal with these things and address them, as they have been almost this bad since 2009, then its apparent that they are not.

#103 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,739 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 05 November 2012 - 14:52

working out lost points just shows what could of been, under hopefully a reasonable dose of reality, will show you how far off someone is from maximising every opportunity

it just is what it is, but can come across as "my team/driver is the best evar"


#104 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,845 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 05 November 2012 - 14:54

My 2c for what it's worth.

LH has driven superbly this year, he's fundamentally been let down by unreliability... which is frankly highly unlikely to be his responsibility (unless someone can state categorically that McLaren has a weakness for being driven over kerbs to the detriment of it's fuel pump or other items - I hear Gary Anderson spoke about "kerb-hopping" yesterday-).

To say LH is the unluckiest driver this season isn't a stretch either imo, the only one I'd possibly throw in there with him is Schumacher, but he's had a couple of crappy races all on his own!

This season actually reminds me of Kimi in 2005, extremely fast car, you never know when it's going to break down though. Now of course people say Kimi is hard on his car.... I think this season is proving something to the contrary seeing as he's completed every lap.

The list is "interesting", I think some of the "pitstop" claims can be removed though, at the start of the season a 4 sec stop was seen as good, now we're often seeing 2.5-3 secs, does that mean 4s is crap? Not in my book. Yes, there was some sticky wheels, or other operational errors, but every single team gets that, it's part & parcel of it. Seems no-one wants to give McLaren credit for the good things they've done, plenty of good stops, the updates have generally worked (ask MS/NR about theirs - won't take long!) and from the outset a very quick car.

As for Valencia, I think giving LH the "win" doesn't stack up at all under the slightest scrutiny and the problem with that is some doubters will need no excuse to rubbish the entire list because of it.

In real world, yes LH could/should be right up there with 2 races to go, but he isn't. It is unfortunate that his bad spell of issues coincides with Red Bull getting it sorted and SV nailing all the points.

It's my opinion that if you're a fan you have some choices, you could be positive, be delighted that LH has shown that 2011 appears to be "just one of those years" and there is no downward slope for him at this time, you'd also probably be happy that he's leaving a team that isn't giving him what he needs and finally you could see a "legacy" ahead for him - new team, clearly a disappointing return from their 3 years as a constructor and then LH arrives.... what happens next?


While I agree with a lot of what you said, i wouldn't remove the pitstops in Malaysia two of the pitstops were longer than 8 seconds, and allowed both Perez and Alonso to pass him, In Valencia the same which allowed Alonso to pass again, and in Bahrain the pit stops were similarly above 8 seconds and dropped him from third place (although Kimi would have got him eventually).



#105 LuisPena

LuisPena
  • Member

  • 132 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 05 November 2012 - 14:57

For anybody who cares, definitive lost points list, with Vettel/Alonso inheritance.

Australia - 3 points lost due to safety car. Vettel inherits 3 points.

Malaysia - debateable whether he could've stayed ahead of Alonso and Perez. I'll say the pit stop didn't affect him.

China - Gearbox penalty. Qualified 2nd, Rosberg untouchable in race and wouldn't have been in so much traffic. 3 points lost.

Bahrain - 2 bad stops dropped him into traffic. It is fair to say he would have finished 4th as he passed Rosberg on track. 6 points lost. Alonso inherits 2.

Spain - pole would have converted into win, most probably. 21 points lost. Alonso inherits 3 points, Vettel 2.

Monaco - If we are working on the assumption that it is the teams fault that Vettel passed him then he lost 2 points and Vettel inherited 2.

Valencia - I believe he would had won had his final stop gone smoothly as he was ahead of Alonso and could've managed his pace, thus conserving tyres. 25 points lost after collision with Maldonado. Alonso inherits 7.

Great Britain - One of those weekends, seemed like McLaren gambled on wet setup, but we will never know. No change.

Germany - Hard to know where he would have finished had he not got a puncture, his pace wasn't magnificent. 4th? Maybe could have benefitted from Vettel's penalty. We'll never know.
12 points lost.

Belgium - once again I have no idea. We don't know what he could have done in the race but we also don't know what would have happened with Alonso. I'm happy to leave this one. There is the possibility that he could have finished ahead of a low starting Vettel, but he drove well.
Nothing doing.

Singapore - Another gearbox issue, was in control, win looked probable. 25 points lost. Vettel inherits 7. Alonso inherits 3.

Japan - We don't know what a good setup/not broken car could have done for Lewis. Button seemed pretty on it. Nothing once more.

Korea - Car failure cost 3rd/4th/5th place. We'll say 5th based on pace of Ferrari. 9 points lost.

UAE - Unknown mechanical issue costs probable win. 25 points lost. Vettel inherits 3 points, Alonso inherits 3 points.

Obviously there have been other issues with other drivers e.g Button dropping out gave Alonso 2nd in Monza, but this is purely Hamiltons issues and the affect on others.

Hamilton points lost = 131 (5 race wins worth)
Alonso inherited from Hamilton = 22
Vettel inherited from Hamilton = 17

Adjusting the WDC accordingly, adding to Hamilton and subtracting from the others =
Hamilton 296
Vettel 238 -58
Alonso 223 -73

58 point lead over VET with 2 races to go. WDC. and I was being conservative on my point givings.

In reality its closer, due to Vettel's DNFs, but that kid won 4 in a row, seemingly unstoppable.


As a Hamilton fan, my advice, get over it!!!!!!
The what if..... doesn't matter.
Just look at his next year, prepare for the worse and expect the best, see ya at Mercedes. ooohhhhh boy.


#106 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,646 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 05 November 2012 - 14:57

Working out lost points is not silly - do you not think the driver himself will have done this and this could infact that have been a large part of his decision to go to Mercedes.

If he wanted to go to a team with demonstrable reliability, he would not have opted for Mercedes.

#107 senna da silva

senna da silva
  • Member

  • 4,431 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 05 November 2012 - 15:00

Anyway you slice it, Lewis has owned Button, and McLaren have sucked donkey balls are the facts. They have thrown the championships away desipte having the best car. Unforgivable. I'm looking forward to Cheering for Lewis in a Merc next year.

#108 ayali

ayali
  • Member

  • 729 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 05 November 2012 - 15:02

Ahhh man Heiki is SOOOOO unlucky this year....team and car are shite!! Here's a list of points Heikki should have if his stupid team had done a good job!!

Melbourne - 25 points - with a much faster car he would have won for sure!
Sepang - 25 points - with a much faster car he would have won for sure!
ad infinitum...

Haha lol you are right of course such a list can be made for all drivers but seemingly only Hamilton's fans feel the need to actually do it.

Anyway there's no denying he was unluckily this year and if some of his fans feel the need to mope together and discuss his rotten luck or what could have been, so be it and let them be.


#109 Burtros

Burtros
  • Member

  • 1,017 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 05 November 2012 - 15:03

The point is that when he did so it was from higher positions than the others.

It's pointless (ahem) to try and attribute points to it, IMO, the best one could say is that he's not had a perfect season, but then who has?


Vettel was leading in Valencia and lost a nailed on win. Button was second so could not have been much less further behind.

Where is the idea that Hamilton has had it so much worse in the reliability stakes, or is a car breaker for that matter, coming from? I see no actual evidence of it at all.

I also see little evidence to call McLaren a tin-pot team with an unreliable car. Work needed yes, but its not as fundamental an issue as it was in 03 and 05.

Edited by Burtros, 05 November 2012 - 15:04.


#110 cooper

cooper
  • Member

  • 388 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 05 November 2012 - 15:05

Working out lost points is not silly - do you not think the driver himself will have done this and this could infact that have been a large part of his decision to go to Mercedes. Arguing over the lost points however is silly - they are gone as you say. You make your own luck as the saying goes - something is wrong in McLaren for these things to have happened - design/testing/set up/general house keeping can all be seen to be at fault in various ways for these faults. Driver generated failures of a fuel pump? Unlikely - short of putting it in a wall there is not much a driver can do to a fuel pump - the cars should be designed to take a lot of stuffing before something goes wrong.

In a sport where every point counts, and championships can be won or lost on a single point, the amount of points thrown away by McLaren - not the drivers in this case, the team in machinary or operational errors is shocking - just plain shocking - for a top team they are a joke. This should be looked at and not excused - McLaren as a team need to deal with these things and address them, as they have been almost this bad since 2009, then its apparent that they are not.

Sorry so yes I acknowledge that McLaren for a top team has thrown away an extortionate amount of points for which they are certainly accountable for! Poor pit stops, in the beginning of the year and reliability towards the end. So having the awareness that this is happening is just cementing that although we seem to have a car that is on the pace, there are many factors which we need to be addressing if we ever want to win a WCC+WDC again.

This can certainly be one of the causes why Hamilton is leaving us and going to Mercedes.

So you make a good point arguing over LOST POINTS is silly because there isn't anything that anyone can do to remedy the situation! Apart from ensure we come into next year with the reliability, strategies and performance.

Importantly (and I have said this for the last three years) what we do not do well is work together well as a team. RBR is a great example of the team working as one unit! Development, Drivers, Race Engineers, Strategies, Pit Stops, Leaders. They always come together and pit their drivers when it's of the most benefit and get the car competitive when it needs to be competitive. McLaren looked like they had that momentum in the beginning of the year but were to risk averse, and I swear they rely to much on technology VS good old human instinct.

#111 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,930 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 05 November 2012 - 15:15

All this crying over Hamilton.
He's had shocking reliability, "luck" and strategic benefit compared to his teammates over the years.
I'm guessing its not a total coincidence.
Bet it follows him to Mercedes.



#112 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 14,241 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 05 November 2012 - 15:22

:up: This season Mclaren have cost Hamilton, last season Hamilton was cost Mclaren, big time. I would even go as far as saying that the bad luck this season makes up for the bulletproof reliability he enjoyed in his first two seasons, and arguably won him the championship in 2008.

Even before Mika left, McLaren and drivers lost a lot of points through bad reliability. Doing similar lists as the one in the OP would show that. Obviously such list are not very realistic. But the theme at McLaren is too common to label it bad luck, at least not when considering the perfection Ron Dennis likes to see.


#113 Burtros

Burtros
  • Member

  • 1,017 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 05 November 2012 - 15:26

All this crying over Hamilton.
He's had shocking reliability, "luck" and strategic benefit compared to his teammates over the years.
I'm guessing its not a total coincidence.
Bet it follows him to Mercedes.


His 'shocking' reliability amounts to one more mechanical DNF than his team mate.


Edited by Burtros, 05 November 2012 - 15:27.


#114 Burtros

Burtros
  • Member

  • 1,017 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 05 November 2012 - 15:28

Even before Mika left, McLaren and drivers lost a lot of points through bad reliability. Doing similar lists as the one in the OP would show that. Obviously such list are not very realistic. But the theme at McLaren is too common to label it bad luck, at least not when considering the perfection Ron Dennis likes to see.


McLaren have had 3 Mechanical DNF's this whole season. OK its more than their rivals but its miles of what Hakkinen and Raikkonen had to put up with at times.

#115 BigWicks

BigWicks
  • Member

  • 750 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 05 November 2012 - 15:30

I don't usually go in for "oh if x had finished he would have got y points and be in position z in the championship", BUT, when it's as clear cut as it is with Hamilton (he's lost 3 certain wins from 3 easy pole positions because of McLaren screwing up), it's fair enough running a scenario of where he and McLaren would be.

#116 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 05 November 2012 - 15:36

Nobody is denying that McLaren blew it this season, but all this talk about "unluckyness" is silly.

F1 is a team sport. It's a car-driver package that competes. The unreliability of the car or whatever incompetence of the team is exactly that and has nothing to do with luck. Unlucky is being taken out like Alonso at Spa for example.

As others said already, if the failings of the team and car were bad luck then it could be claimed that driving a car that is not that fast is also "bad luck".

Edited by EvanRainer, 05 November 2012 - 15:37.


#117 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 14,241 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 05 November 2012 - 15:53

McLaren have had 3 Mechanical DNF's this whole season. OK its more than their rivals but its miles of what Hakkinen and Raikkonen had to put up with at times.

True, and add Kimi to that list too. The majority of that was Mercedes engines and integration issues with Neweys designs.

#118 StefanArak

StefanArak
  • Member

  • 198 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 05 November 2012 - 16:00

Six-Sigma might help with the production process but it has nothing to do with the statistical difference between 2 team mates.

One guys car breaks down 3/4/5 times more often than is team mate, then statistically the most likely explanation is that he is harder on his car than his team mate. Very simple, you would have thought.

Other explanations, far more unlikely, will need very strong evidence to back them up, evidence we have seen none of so far.

(Wow, do people still say "get real"?)


Why do other explanations need very strong evidence to back them up? Just because you personally deem them 'unlikely?'
That holds no more weight than me saying that as you're the proponent of the claim that Hamilton breaks his car more, you need to provide very strong evidence to back this up, as this is much more unlikely than simple statistical variance over a very small sample size. (Evidence we have seen none of so far).

You clearly don't understand statistical sample sizes very well. Spend a year playing poker and you'll understand that variance is an incredibly cruel mistress, even over 100,000 instances can the true statistical picture not come to light. Using Hamilton's breakdowns as evidence of him being a car-breaker as opposed to unlucky is circular. If not, we can simply tot-up teammates' mechanical failures for every recorded season, and every time they have an additional one compared to their teammate they get +1, one fewer they get -1, etc. By your logic we can see who has the highest rate of forcing mechanical failures. Of course, no-one would ever do this as it's totally useless, and not representative.
Even if we accept that Hamilton is 10% more likely to break his car, over 100 races if Button had 5 mechanical failures, Hamilton should only have experienced 5.5 (i.e. 6). So if you want your sample of this season to be representative, you have to postulate that Hamilton is in fact 200-500% harder on his car than Button is. Does that sound right to you, when comparing their driving styles visually, or from anything the mechanics have said? Fact is, even if HAM is much harder on his car, he is running WAY above EV (Expected Value) in terms of how often he is experiencing the failures.

So, I don't even accept your theory in the first place, but even if we do, Hamilton is either hard on the car to ludicrous levels, or he is still experiencing very bad luck.

Edited by StefanArak, 05 November 2012 - 16:07.


#119 karlth

karlth
  • Member

  • 16,248 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 05 November 2012 - 16:06

McLaren have had 3 Mechanical DNF's this whole season. OK its more than their rivals but its miles of what Hakkinen and Raikkonen had to put up with at times.


Mechanical unreliability was much more common in F1 during the 90s and 00s.

Advertisement

#120 Rocket73

Rocket73
  • Member

  • 1,472 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 05 November 2012 - 16:10

the op did, unless you guys missed it



which was the reason I replied back when this was part of the Hamilton thread. The process of ignoring everybody else's misfortunes, focusing only on Lewis' and then with some suspect math declaring him WDC is silly.


yes he did and in BOLD for lord's sake...

#121 Mc_Silver

Mc_Silver
  • Member

  • 2,156 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 05 November 2012 - 16:12

I think you fairly summarised Lewis's misfortunes this year. Lewis definitely could be in contention this year without cock-ups from the team. His driving this year was faultless and he is driving much better than 2007 now. It is shame he is almost 100 points behind vettel now :|

Edited by Mc_Silver, 05 November 2012 - 16:13.


#122 Rocket73

Rocket73
  • Member

  • 1,472 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 05 November 2012 - 16:13

The only person in cuckoo land is you for even claiming that Hamilton is harder on his cars than any other... You're trying to make your opinion a fact and you are no better than any other person in this thread, give your head a massive shake and then when you try to make the statement again at least back it up with something instead of pulling it out of your arse.


actually i have made many posts long and short about lewis' reliability issues

and anyway i did put forward the comparison of him against his team mate of 3 years...

i would say that is 'something'

(so much anger on this thread)

Edited by Rocket73, 05 November 2012 - 16:16.


#123 skidmarks

skidmarks
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 05 November 2012 - 16:26

actually i have made many posts long and short about lewis' reliability issues

and anyway i did put forward the comparison of him against his team mate of 3 years...

i would say that is 'something'

(so much anger on this thread)


Perhaps you could enlighten us? I wouldn't mind seeing your reasoning behind the conclusion that Lewis is harder on his machinery, thus responsible for any sort of mechanical failure. I think that anything less than an analysis of all the mechanical failures/issues this season that Hamilton has suffered, and how his driving style contributes to them, would mean that we can easily ignore your assertions.


#124 Nigol

Nigol
  • Member

  • 1,090 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 05 November 2012 - 16:32

Giving him the win for Valencia is a bit over the top, on the other hand you haven't given him points for Spa etc so maybe that evens out. Not saying it's 100% the truth, but it gives you at least a good idea of how much bad luck he had this year.

Edited by Nigol, 05 November 2012 - 16:33.


#125 MirNyet

MirNyet
  • Member

  • 908 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 05 November 2012 - 16:41

If he wanted to go to a team with demonstrable reliability, he would not have opted for Mercedes.


Mercedes are part of his racing family - family seems to be important to him, it may have been a case of 'anywhere but here'.

#126 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,274 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 05 November 2012 - 16:47

Perhaps you could enlighten us? I wouldn't mind seeing your reasoning behind the conclusion that Lewis is harder on his machinery, thus responsible for any sort of mechanical failure. I think that anything less than an analysis of all the mechanical failures/issues this season that Hamilton has suffered, and how his driving style contributes to them, would mean that we can easily ignore your assertions.


Similarly you have no way of proving the opposite, that it was all bad luck. Can you provide such an analysis?



#127 senna da silva

senna da silva
  • Member

  • 4,431 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 05 November 2012 - 17:16

Similarly you have no way of proving the opposite, that it was all bad luck. Can you provide such an analysis?


You say bad luck, I say incompetance.

#128 Cenotaph

Cenotaph
  • Member

  • 2,317 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 05 November 2012 - 17:22

In 2005 Raikkonen got quite the reputation for being a car breaker, in 2010 it was Vettel. I guess it's fair that Hamilton gets it now :p

#129 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,020 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 05 November 2012 - 17:32

Nobody is denying that McLaren blew it this season, but all this talk about "unluckyness" is silly.

F1 is a team sport. It's a car-driver package that competes. The unreliability of the car or whatever incompetence of the team is exactly that and has nothing to do with luck. Unlucky is being taken out like Alonso at Spa for example.

As others said already, if the failings of the team and car were bad luck then it could be claimed that driving a car that is not that fast is also "bad luck".


Why use alonso as the example when you could just use lewis at Spa?! :p

The talk of luck is relevant when assessing driver performance, particularly teammate performance where the variable of the car has been minimised.

At the moment, for example, you'd be correct in saying that the combination of mclaren and lewis are only very slightly doing better than the combination of mclaren and button. However, I would argue that the performance of mclaren in assisting button has been far superior to assisting lewis (reliability, pit stops, refuelling etc) and in turn lewis's performance has been superior to button's by a larger gap than the relative points show.

So the reasons are there but as far as driver performance goes the above = luck imo.

Edited by robefc, 05 November 2012 - 17:33.


#130 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,020 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 05 November 2012 - 17:43

My 2c for what it's worth.

snip - well written stuff I agree with - snip

It's my opinion that if you're a fan you have some choices, you could be positive, be delighted that LH has shown that 2011 appears to be "just one of those years" and there is no downward slope for him at this time, you'd also probably be happy that he's leaving a team that isn't giving him what he needs and finally you could see a "legacy" ahead for him - new team, clearly a disappointing return from their 3 years as a constructor and then LH arrives.... what happens next?


I think most neutrals and also maybe a lot of button fans will admit Lewis has been the better driver this year by some distance, the extreme views posted by some lewis fans drive them in the other direction though and understandably so.

As to the paragraph above, I'm delighted that Lewis has driven so well, is back to his very best form and hopefully shown that 2011 will go down as an aberration by the end of his career.

I'm incredibly frustrated that his level of performance has led to him being out of the title fight so early, only 5th in the standings and barely above his teammate.

And of course there is the fear that not only will his driving count for nothing this year but in the next few years as well if merc don't get their act together.

I guess it's hard enough watching vettel make the most of the machinery at his disposal to become a 3xWDC (probably) but we don't even have the comfort of watching Lewis's reputation go up a la alonso's - who's not been given the quickest car in the last few years but has been recognised as possibly the best driver in some or all of those years. I think Lewis was at least his and vettel's equal in 2010 and the same this year (actually I'd put alonso ahead this year) but the story of 2010 was that he threw it away (ribbush imo), 2011 was just plain horrible by him and now 2012 may end up with those not in the know thinking not only did he finish well down but he may also be beaten by button, this season and over the course of their career together.

Hmmmm, I might stop writing as I'm starting to wallow! :p

#131 skidmarks

skidmarks
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 05 November 2012 - 17:52

Similarly you have no way of proving the opposite, that it was all bad luck. Can you provide such an analysis?


Ahh, but there's the rub. I haven't actually made any sort of claim about the cause of the mechanical failures. So there's no need for me to provide anything. Rocket73 on the other hand is making a rather damming assertion, so I think that it's only fair that he explains his reasoning.






#132 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,274 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 05 November 2012 - 18:01

Ahh, but there's the rub. I haven't actually made any sort of claim about the cause of the mechanical failures. So there's no need for me to provide anything. Rocket73 on the other hand is making a rather damming assertion, so I think that it's only fair that he explains his reasoning.


You are, you're claiming it was luck, Rocket is making a counter claim.

#133 bub

bub
  • Member

  • 2,248 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 05 November 2012 - 18:03

Every driver loses/inherits points through there own/others misfortunes so accounting for every single point like this is nonesense.

I think most level headed people will agree that Hamilton would be in a very strong position in the WDC if it wasn't for the amateurish performance from the McLaren sporting operations and laughable reliability this season.


I agree with this, I must be level headed.

#134 fastdriver

fastdriver
  • Member

  • 575 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 05 November 2012 - 18:29

Nobody is denying that McLaren blew it this season, but all this talk about "unluckyness" is silly.

F1 is a team sport. It's a car-driver package that competes. The unreliability of the car or whatever incompetence of the team is exactly that and has nothing to do with luck. Unlucky is being taken out like Alonso at Spa for example.

As others said already, if the failings of the team and car were bad luck then it could be claimed that driving a car that is not that fast is also "bad luck".

Amen!

#135 kpchelsea

kpchelsea
  • Member

  • 249 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 05 November 2012 - 19:19

Jeez!! OH REALLY SORRY TO ALL OFFENDED HAMMY FANS THAT I SAID SOMETHING OUT OF LINE IN A LEWIS THREAD..

I am humble now forever onwards..

I am just raising the question why lewis suffers more than his team mate..it's not meant to be a big insult.

But alas you have taken it that way, again.



Given, as you say, that Buttons car is reasonably reliable, that is statistically by far the most likely explanation.

There's no evidence whatsoever that Hamilton is especially hard on his car, this seems like overflow from the Lewis/Jenson thread



#136 skidmarks

skidmarks
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 05 November 2012 - 19:32

You are, you're claiming it was luck, Rocket is making a counter claim.


If you could be so kind as to quote where I have claimed this.


#137 MP422

MP422
  • Member

  • 1,850 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 05 November 2012 - 20:28

I think you fairly summarised Lewis's misfortunes this year. Lewis definitely could be in contention this year without cock-ups from the team. His driving this year was faultless and he is driving much better than 2007 now. It is shame he is almost 100 points behind vettel now :|


Indeed Mc_silver, I'm disappointed as well.

#138 Kingshark

Kingshark
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 05 November 2012 - 20:44

I think one of the clearly potential championship leaders has been unfairly omitted here, so I’ll count the points he probably lost. The man in question – Pedro de la Rosa. Now, you might think this is a long shot, but bear with me.

Australia – wary of potential HRT dominance due to their clearly superior race pace, the FIA did not allow them to take part due to some ridiculous rule they made up. Since Pedro is a better driver than Narain, this is a 25 pointer lost.

Malaysia – Alonso and Perez were the class of the field, but a bogus drive through cost Pedro a sufice third place. 15 points.

Bahrain – HRT struggled with the tyres on 50 degree celcius tyremac on a race that shouldn't even have happened, no fault of the driver of course. He should’ve been right after the Red Bulls and the Lotuses. 10 points.

Spain – Pedro was put under too much pressure, this being his home grand prix, and couldn’t handle it. Not his fault since if the organizers called this one the “European Grand Prix”, he would’ve easily run away with the win. 25 points.

Monaco – Maldonado, usually being supremely quick on this track, qualified behind Pedro, proving de la Rosa’s immense potential here. Alas, Pastor took him out in the first corner, costing him a victory. 25 points.

Canada – if not for the brake failure, de la Rosa would’ve surely been among the people overtaking Alonso on heavily worn tyres. You can obviously note that as he was substituing Perez on this track last year and was generally just as quick. 4th place. 12 points.

Europe – the safety car sabotaged HRT’s strategy, not allowing Pedro to break into the top 3 ahead of Schumacher like the otherwise would have, easily. 15 points.

Great Britain - A wet qualifying and a poor strategic call left Pedro on the back of the grid. Had it not been for that, he would've been right after the Red Bull's and Ferrari's. 10 points.

Hungary - the track where Pedro recorded his career-best finish of second. If the season went as well for him as it should’ve, he would’ve been able to easily equal that result. 18 points.

Belgium - Debris after the Grosjean destruction combined with Caterham's incompetent pit crew damaged his car severally. Button was untouchable, but Pedro would've gotten second place - 18 points.

Japan - Suzuka is a drivers circuit where Pedro obviously would've made the difference. Raikkonen's spin costed him him an easy pole and lights to flag cruzing victory - 25 points.

Korea - Red Bull and Ferrari were out of reach, but a Throttle failure cost Pedro a suffice 5th place - 10 points.

India - His brakes failed with 12 laps to go. Vettel was the man to beat that weekend but Pedro was clearly catching Alonso and Webber, visible to the naked eye - 18 points.

Abu Dhabi - Incompetence by the HRT team for getting the tyre blanket stuck in the car hence he had to start the race from the pitlane behind Vettel. If Seb managed to battle his way up to 3rd position after that Pedro should've been able to do the same. Keep in mind his teammate collided with a Mercedes earlier that race, proving HRT had genuine race pace. This is a 4th place and 12 points lost.

Overall, Pedro would've been 3rd in the standings with 238 points, and still in the thick of the championship hunt. Keep in mind – I’m fairly conservative here.

Edited by Kingshark, 09 November 2012 - 21:28.


#139 Pothead4Philosopher

Pothead4Philosopher
  • Member

  • 541 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 05 November 2012 - 21:03

(.......Pedro's way.......)

Overall, Pedro would've been 3rd in the standings with 226 points, and still in the thick of the championship hunt. Keep in mind – I’m fairly conservative here.


Gotta hand it to you m8, compelling arguments....;-)

Advertisement

#140 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 05 November 2012 - 21:17

I think one of the clearly potential championship leaders has been unfairly omitted here, so I’ll count the points he probably lost. The man in question – Pedro de la Rosa. Now, you might think this is a long shot, but bear with me.

Australia – wary of potential HRT dominance due to their clearly superior race pace, the FIA did not allow them to take part due to some ridiculous rule they made up. Since Pedro is a better driver than Narain, this is a 25 pointer lost.

Malaysia – Alonso and Perez were the class of the field, but a bogus drive through cost Pedro a sufice third place. 15 points.

Bahrain – HRT struggled with the tyres on 50 degree celcius tyremac on a race that shouldn't even have happened, no fault of the driver of course. He should’ve been right after the Red Bulls and the Lotuses. 10 points.

Spain – Pedro was put under too much pressure, this being his home grand prix, and couldn’t handle it. Not his fault since if the organizers called this one the “European Grand Prix”, he would’ve easily run away with the win. 25 points.

Monaco – Maldonado, usually being supremely quick on this track, qualified behind Pedro, proving de la Rosa’s immense potential here. Alas, Pastor took him out in the first corner, costing him a victory. 25 points.

Canada – if not for the brake failure, de la Rosa would’ve surely been among the people overtaking Alonso on heavily worn tyres. You can obviously note that as he was substituing Perez on this track last year and was generally just as quick. 4th place. 12 points.

Europe – the safety car sabotaged HRT’s strategy, not allowing Pedro to break into the top 3 ahead of Schumacher like the otherwise would have, easily. 15 points.

Great Britain - A wet qualifying and a poor strategic call left Pedro on the back of the grid. Had it not been for that, he would've been right after the Red Bull's and Ferrari's. 10 points.

Hungary - the track where Pedro recorded his career-best finish of second. If the season went as well for him as it should’ve, he would’ve been able to easily equal that result. 18 points.

Belgium - Debris after the Grosjean destruction combined with Caterham's incompetent pit crew damaged his car severally. Button was untouchable, but Pedro would've gotten second place - 18 points.

Japan - Suzuka is a drivers circuit where Pedro obviously would've made the difference. Raikkonen's spin costed him him an easy pole and lights to flag cruzing victory - 25 points.

Korea - Red Bull and Ferrari were out of reach, but a Throttle failure cost Pedro a suffice 5th place - 10 points.

India - His brakes failed with 12 laps to go. Vettel was the man to beat that weekend but Pedro was clearly catching Alonso and Webber, visible to the naked eye - 18 points.

Overall, Pedro would've been 3rd in the standings with 226 points, and still in the thick of the championship hunt. Keep in mind – I’m fairly conservative here.


I hope that didn't take you all night.

#141 Mandzipop

Mandzipop
  • RC Forum Host

  • 4,142 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 05 November 2012 - 22:06

There is no denying that Lewis has driven the socks off the car. And for a large part of the season it has been the quickest car in his hands.

However, he is not the only driver to suffer misfortune. He has had a lot of misfortune, but we don't always hear about how much other drivers have had. I mean say a KERS failure for 12 laps of the race and losing 3 positions because of it. We don't know all of the technical misfortunes, so it is very difficult to get the full picture.

What we do know that all things being equal, Lewis would still be in the WDC battle. Whether he would be leading it is not a given as you can never be 100% certain of what the following circumstances would have occured. You can only do the maths by working it out with all 24 drivers finishing and where they would have been relative to if all other drivers finished from the point of retirement/issues with no safety car or accidents.

It is an interesting exercise though, however pointless (pardon the pun ;) ).

#142 Kucki

Kucki
  • Member

  • 1,239 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 05 November 2012 - 23:28

Thanks for the list, I was wondering during the season several times whether this guy could ever get a break from all the misfortune. Everytime he was in the lead or close to, you just knew something is going to happen again.

Now someone ought to make a list like that about Michael Schumacher. It was almost as unlucky as Hamiltons season if I remember right.

Edited by Kucki, 05 November 2012 - 23:30.


#143 Moore

Moore
  • Member

  • 395 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 05 November 2012 - 23:35

actually i have made many posts long and short about lewis' reliability issues

and anyway i did put forward the comparison of him against his team mate of 3 years...

i would say that is 'something'

(so much anger on this thread)


Ok, I understand I might have been a bit angry at the claim at first but I still think it is laughable that you're trying to push this forward, I'm sorry but Vettel had poor reliability in 2010 compared to his teammate and he isn't renowned for being a car breaker, just look at last year he had what 1or2 mechanical retirements?

If anyone is willing I'd like to see the comparisons between LH and FA and LH and HK, just to see how much mechanical issues he has had. I'd do it myself but I haven't got time at the moment.

#144 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 6,161 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 00:14

Thanks for the list, I was wondering during the season several times whether this guy could ever get a break from all the misfortune. Everytime he was in the lead or close to, you just knew something is going to happen again.

Now someone ought to make a list like that about Michael Schumacher. It was almost as unlucky as Hamiltons season if I remember right.


They're probably about equal, especially in terms of dropping out of races when in a strong position. It's a cruel twist of fate when you see Hamilton dropping out in the lead and yet having a working car when he's outside the podium. Same goes for Schumcher, earlier this year when the Mercedes was a strong potential race-winner he had issue after issue (some self-inflicted it must be said, but mostly not), but now when he's racing for ninth his car seems reliable.

#145 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,274 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 06:38

If you could be so kind as to quote where I have claimed this.


I think standard procedure here would be a picture of Jean Luc with his face in his hands.

#146 moorsey

moorsey
  • Member

  • 637 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 07:51

The number of points being lost by almost every driver, through no fault of their own, does almost prove how valid the old scoring method was when each driver could drop his 2 worse finishes. It wouldn't solve the discrepancies but it would at least make the WDC scores more valid towards the driver's results.

#147 skidmarks

skidmarks
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:00

I think standard procedure here would be a picture of Jean Luc with his face in his hands.


Perhaps you could explain why? Please point out where I've made any claims about Hamilton's reliability and the points lost due to them, being down to "bad luck". Because I can tell you that I haven't made any. I have said that the woes in the last four races alone warrants discussion due to the subject of the thread (lost points) but nothing more.

I suggest that you either respond intelligently, quoting sources and facts or not at all.

#148 decoder

decoder
  • Member

  • 105 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:01

The number of points being lost by almost every driver, through no fault of their own, does almost prove how valid the old scoring method was when each driver could drop his 2 worse finishes. It wouldn't solve the discrepancies but it would at least make the WDC scores more valid towards the driver's results.


Not really because car reliability is an important responsibility of the team, and allowing drop races, would reduce it. Hamilton has been very unlucky.

#149 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,274 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:38

Perhaps you could explain why? Please point out where I've made any claims about Hamilton's reliability and the points lost due to them, being down to "bad luck". Because I can tell you that I haven't made any. I have said that the woes in the last four races alone warrants discussion due to the subject of the thread (lost points) but nothing more.

I suggest that you either respond intelligently, quoting sources and facts or not at all.


Oh ffs, that's the basis of the discussion, read the thread. The original suggestion was that Lewis was unlucky to have the mechanical failures, Rocket made the argument that Lewis may bear some responsibility for these failures. You were disputing Rockets claims ergo...

#150 skidmarks

skidmarks
  • Member

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:55

Oh ffs, that's the basis of the discussion, read the thread. The original suggestion was that Lewis was unlucky to have the mechanical failures, Rocket made the argument that Lewis may bear some responsibility for these failures. You were disputing Rockets claims ergo...


Ergo, you are making an assumption and a false one at that. You're reading between the lines and seeing what you want to see.

  • Nowhere in the first post or in Buttoneer's subsequent post about the split does it mention luck.
  • Rocket's argument is that Hamilton's malfunctions are down to his driving.
  • Asking Rocket to explain his reasoning is NOT the same as saying "it's down to bad luck". If he fails to explain his reasoning in a convincing manner, then all we can do his discount his argument, nothing more. Which leaves room for another hypothesis. Incompetence, manufacturing errors, and anything else that is outside of Hamilton's control.

The only person who is saying that "if it's not down to Hamilton, it's bad luck" is you.