3870 replies to this topic

[senna da silva]

Button 672

Hamilton 657

[thesham01]

Good man senna da silva

[PretentiousBread]

Pot, Kettle. Of gigantic proportions. Seemingly hourly posts about these missing 100 points and 6 wins or whatever it is. Yet you have no idea what the roots of the mechanical or strategic problems were, that Hamilton would have gone on to finish anyway, or recognising that all racing accidents are part of the sport. And that's before you either acknowledge that every other driver could be afforded the same calibration of their scores to a greater or lesser degree, not least Jenson Button, for whom you have previously published decidedly unfair reconciliations yet had the front to describe them as "unreasonably fair"!

Sorry, I have firm beliefs in this but i'm not being intellectually disingenuous, that was Lazy with his laughably skewed 'stats' of the final third of the season who was being disingenuous. What is ridiculous is how you're able to entirely call into question swathes of bad fortune because you can't be 100% certain that Hamilton had no absolutely zero influence over it, even though logically we can be almost entirely certain he had nothing to do with all his mechanical issues this season. Hamilton hasn't produced a single bonafide on track error this year, yet you cast doubt over him being able to score big points in these races where he was denied through misfortune. Were you waiting on him binning it into the wall while out in front? That's reaching more than we are. Of course racing incidents are part of the sport, and of course it is a multi-layered team sport - we're not stupid - we are only creating a hypothetical which isolates driver performance, separate to the wider issues which affect a driver's campaign, but have no bearing on how good or bad the driver's own personal performance has been.

As it is a direct comparison between two drivers, it's unnecessary and frankly daft to expect us to also factor in mechanical/operational problems for every single driver on the grid in order to make our argument legitimate. We aren't trying to rewrite history, the record books stand, we aren't putting precise figures on the points lost, just looking at the overall effect. My 'unfair reconciliations' of JB's bad luck last year were fair, it's your own bias that finds them so bewilderingly unfair, and if they genuinely weren't fair then you would have countered them with your own interpretation of events. But as ALWAYS you don't, because they don't back up your argument but you pretend you don't because it's all beneath you. You prefer not to analyse, and rather make wider points which ignore context and detail and thus can't be countered easily, and as soon as someone produces a list unfavourable to your driver you dish out the ' 's and never tackle it head on.

What I (and I am certainly in a large group of both Lewis and Jenson fans who hold this view) is disputing, is the size of this black whole of luck/lost points/class/performance call it what you will. And does a loss of set up direction mean any less than a loss of in-race strategic direction. Both of which are the function of a TEAM SPORT. You see them differently. Of course you do. How convenient. Not disingenuous at all.

The lists I created ignored strategic issues for this reason, that it's partly a function of the driver's own race performance. I confined my original list to operational/mechanical issues, and you laughed your head off at it like a child because it still reflected really badly on JB.

A mid-season loss of setup direction can't be classed as 'bad luck'. How do I know? Because the driver is the focus of the setup direction - if they went in the wrong direction it was due to their feedback and characteristics as a driver. That is not 'bad luck'. As I've already said, it's a team sport in which we are isolating driver performance. It's not that difficult. What's disingenuous about that? Nothing.

All you appear to want to do is paint the best possible picture for Lewis and the worst passable version for Jenson and declare it a smashing. Which it just wasn't. JB's season could have been very, very different had he not clipped the HRT in Malaysia, suffered the hydraulics in Monza, or found the set up solution sooner for a few instances. I guess your view hangs on the BAD LUCK for JB that in season testing is banned or I guess we'd be having a very different conversation. All these things for both drivers come down to what their true performance level was capable of. Either apply that without clause to both drivers or don't bother.

Why do you think this? I'm consistent in how I judge both driver's incidents of misfortune, I hold them both to the same standards, I don't understand why I need to defend myself on this. What examples do you have of me not judging them to the same standards?

I agree JB's season could also have been a lot different, but who's fault was it for crashing into the HRT? Who was at the root of the mid season setup woes? Was it only JB that was banned from in season testing? These examples you gave are of issues that JB was partially at fault for, except for Monza, which both thesham and I credited him for in our 'lists'. How in your right mind can you even begin to compare that to:

- Your car giving up while in the lead at 2 GPs
- Being underfuelled on a pole lap and having to start from 24th
- Being the 8th car to run through debris and be the only one to get a puncture,
- Having an undetected roll bar failure at the start of qualifying till the end of the weekend,
- Having a rear suspension failure midrace dropping from 4th to 10th
- Having 3 consecutive tardy pitstops in a race losing around 15s not including all the added traffic incurred by it
- Getting wiped out while in the lead in a zero fault accident
- Getting a gearbox penalty after qualifying 2nd


That's not to mention how JB profitted directly from most of these instances.

For sure Monza wasn't JB's only slice of bad luck either:

- Bad pitstop at China costing him the shot at the win (though had the good fortune of starting ahead of Hamilton because of a gearbox penalty)
- Retirement from 7th at Bahrain (though would have been behind Hamilton but for the aforementioned catalogue of disastrous pitstops)
- Mechanical issue at Montreal, costing him free practice time, race may not have been as disastrous weren't it for this
- Gearbox penalty at Suzuka, finished 4th from having actually qualified 3rd, but again is tempered by the fact Hamilton had a mechanical failure which he drove with almost all weekend
- Got wiped out from the midfield at Korea on first lap and wasn't at fault
- mechanical failure midway through Q2 at Austin
- safety car wiping out a 40s + cushion on Hamilton at Brazil


And if you think i've forgotten his bad luck with yellow flags in qualifying at Silverstone and Korea, I haven't, I just can't count them because on both occasions Hamilton had already made it through by setting faster banker laps than JB did, (and if I was more mean spirited I could include Q2 at Austin in that breath) so you can't say JB had no responsibility in this happening. They weren't cases of pure bad luck.

As you can see from the above lists, i'm consistent and thorough in what i'm including. And what you can also see is that Button's issues cost him generally from lower positions than Hamilton's did, whereas Hamilton rarely profitted from JB's misfortunes.

Seriously, I have no problem with the idea that Lewis was better and unluckier than JB this season, I think I described Hamilton as excellent and Jenson as Good (how can 3 wins, and solving a massive set up issue be poor) but trying to paint the picture you do and describing us as disingenuous and every theory you don't hold as blind is well, whatever mate, quite frankly. Short of all agreeing to support and worship Lewis, I don't really see how we are going to agree on this.

The fact that there are many Hamilton fans suggesting that your going too far says it all really. Actual fans, comfortable that he beat not thrashed Lewis. What are they, disingenuous?

Eventually solving a setup issue which he himself was the root of you regard as an example of how good he was? Sure that is one way of looking at it

His 3 wins were excellent, but it was a 20 race season, for most of the rest of it Hamilton was on a different level to him, and the only reason that wasn't reflected in the end of season points is for all the aforementioned reasons. Yet you cling on to the overall points as an example of how 'equal' they are. All of what i've said, and even what you've said is that points aren't reflective at all of how good someone's actual level of performance is, that's why if you take a look at the top 5/top 10 drivers of the year threads, just as many people are voting Hamilton as driver of the year as they are Vettel, if not more, and that's despite finishing 90+ points behind him in the points table.


To finalise, these are a few condensed nuggets of information to clarify my overall position on LH vs JB

- JB is a better driver than most people gave/give him credit for, and is much closer to Hamilton than most thought he would be
- But he is not as close to Hamilton as most JB fans contend he is, there is still a significant margin of performance defecit between them as drivers
- JB has strengths as a driver that LH doesn't have, but they do not fully compensate for his own weaknesses.
- LH won in 2010 convincingly
- JB won in 2011 convincingly
- LH tanked JB in 2012
- While I believe the term 'crushed' is highly provocative in relation to LH vs JB in 2012, I don't believe it is inaccurate at all
- The term crushed would be wholly inaccurate and unfair of their relative performances across the whole of 2010-2012.

[senna da silva]

Who has more points between Button and Ham now when you count all three seasons?

[trogggy]

random quotes

Do you have an argument to make?

[trogggy]

Good man senna da silva

Which of those quotes would you like to pick as a typical example to back up your claim?

No rush.
Edit:
Just to remind you of the criteria...
- Button fan.
- Very vocal in this thread.
- Claiming scoring more points over 3 years = Jenson 'won' or 'beat LH' or performed better than him.

That's what you said - well, you said there was a tide of the blighters, but a couple should do nicely.

Edited by trogggy, 05 December 2012 - 16:36.

[trogggy]

It's pedantic because I was explaining to someone why I am trying to hammer home how Button was crushed this year. My explanation was because there are/were some very vocal posters who are arguing something that isn't true. That was my point.

Finally something I can agree with.

[senna da silva]

Pedantic?

You made a statement that Button fans were claiming that he 'won their three years together'.
That isn't true.
Is it?

[trogggy]

I think a certain kind of Hamilton fan sees it as an insult to even mention that JB scored more points. Maybe that's the problem here.

Personally I'm offended when anybody talks about qualifying, so we should ban that.
Unless Jense is quicker than Checo next season of course.

Edited by trogggy, 05 December 2012 - 16:42.

[senna da silva]

Bitter much?

You asked for examples and I gave them, and this is your response?

[trogggy]

You asked for examples and I gave them, and this is your response?

First 2 quotes - posters that have clearly stated they think LH has 'won' / performed better. Would you like a link?
And yet they're pleased that he's (JB that is) scored more points...cheeky blighters, shouldn't even mention it.

The others I don't recognise as JB fans (or at least JB fans who contribute regularly here). One at least is a Kimi fan.

And if you've been here since 2003 then I'm sure you know a post containing just a quote can't be quoted in turn.
If you think those posts show thesham was right then pick one and say why.

Edited by trogggy, 05 December 2012 - 16:50.

[senna da silva]

I think a certain kind of Hamilton fan sees it as an insult to even mention that JB scored more points. Maybe that's the problem here.

Not at all, it is a stat. However, to base an argument and state as fact that this one statistic proves a driver "won" is disingenious to say the least.

Anyone with any sense of modicum and who follows the sport knows for a fact that Lewis is the better racer and quicker driver.
Lewis was massively let down by McLaren this year plus was taken out of three races by drivers who all received penalties for their avoidable actions. To disregard this and only hold up the points total as a measure of competance is, again disingenious.

[trogggy]

Not at all, it is a stat. However, to base an argument and state as fact that this one statistic proves a driver "won" is disingenious to say the least.

I agree.
Now tell me which JB fan has done that. I'm sure some have (it's tempting) but I haven't seen one who posts regularly in this thread do it.
Which is where we started.

[PretentiousBread]

I agree.
Now tell me which JB fan has done that. I'm sure some have (it's tempting) but I haven't seen one who posts regularly in this thread do it.
Which is where we started.

I'm not as interested in the debate over who said what, but I can be of assistance:

The fact that there are many Hamilton fans suggesting that your going too far says it all really. Actual fans, comfortable that he beat not thrashed Lewis. What are they, disingenuous?

[bauss]

this thread is now silly, only in the microcosm of this thread is there even a big debate or discussion about both... both sides should move on...if you havent convinced anyone about your arguments now, you probably never will.

Edited by bauss, 05 December 2012 - 17:20.

[trogggy]

I'm not as interested in the debate over who said what, but I can be of assistance:

I think (hope!) you'll find he meant to write 'Jenson' there. It makes more sense that way, at least.

[03011969]

this thread is now silly, only in the microcosm of this thread is there even a big debate or discussion about both... both sides should move on...if you havent convinced anyone about your arguments now, you probably never will.

thesham01 has convinced me of something...

Edited by 3011969, 05 December 2012 - 17:27.

[Rinehart]

What?

Someone claims there are floods of posters saying JB beat LH.
How do you 'prove' that isn't true?
Quote the whole thread?

I feel quite privileged that the whole thread seems to have come down to what I believe!

Clearly I have stated numerous times that I believe Lewis beat Jenson 2-1 but overall (not the points, their career comparisons) they remain a pretty evenly matched pair of drivers arriving there through different methods and skills. Exactly as I predicted 3 years ago. Sure as shyte I was pretty much on my own with that prediction 3 years ago, pretty sure I'm not alone with that belief now. Yet I'm the one being accused (incorrectly) of holding an exreeme view. Well frankly if people (not me) want to beleive that Jenson beat Lewis over 3 years ago because on a techicality he scored more agregated points, so what. Hardly an extreeme view, its a fatual one, even if its not a fair or representitive one.

So I'm with you Trogster, the enemy is largely invented on this thread.

Can't fathom this thread sometimes.

[tifosiMac]

Yawn yawn yawn.

[Rinehart]

You asked for examples and I gave them, and this is your response?

Your example is to use one of my posts to PROVE someone, err "me", thinks Jenson beat Lewis overall because of the points total, when I've said I don't think that at all. I think Lewis beat Jenson 2 season to 1.

So, an example of you being completely and utterly wrong is all it seems to be.

And for about the only time on this thread: Someone can prove it.

[Buttoneer]

Yuck. Time to close.

However, I appreciate that this partnership will be discussed long after the end of this year so a new thread to compare their entire time together has been opened here;

http://forums.autosp...howtopic=178676