1288 replies to this topic

[Rodaknee]

The rules state that it is only considered a false start if the sensor says so. If the car visually moves but then stops again without the sensor triggering, everything is still legal. Vettel clearly moved, yes, but it was not enough to trigger the sensor which checks whether the car left the box. It's the same as the track limits issues - as long as any part of the tire, even 1mm, is still on the line, everything is fine.

Who sets the sensor level? 

[Augurk]

As a viewer who doesn't have access to Sky's broadcasts and has to wait until C4 show highlights, I'd just like to thank all those who post in these race day topics as I have this open on my phone and the Autosport Live feed at the same time while the race is being run, and that's how I get to 'experience' F1 live these days.

 

You guys here are way more informative than the Autosport guy. And the humour is much better....

 

Thanks all

 

o7

Same here. Even though I watch the races live I read the forums to stay up to date on what's happening as per the lack of actual correct information from the TV feed. 

Same with all the news though. When I read a rumour but am unsure about it, I look up the forums and usually find out within a few seconds. 

[robefc]

Can’t find the TV coverage thread but just wanted to give a thumbs up for the SC/VSC pit time information - although I’m not entirely sure if they were showing pit time loss or the difference between pitting under normal race conditions v SC/VSC!

[ExFlagMan]

Where did Masi come from and whats his relevant expertise/experience? Who does he answer too?

 

Seems to be a complete plum so far this year.

 

Seano

 

That is a very good question.

 

I tried trawling the web to find this a few races ago and there seems to be somewhat of a mystery about his past experience.

 

The only things I could find were these

 

     https://www.gpblog.c...hael-masi-.html

 

     https://www.autospor...o-whiting-shoes

 

which do not really give much information.

[Viryfan]

He was race director in v8 supercars.

Edited by Viryfan, 12 October 2020 - 09:01.

[FTB]

Yeah it wasn't an easy call. Because the guys behind could have also not pitted and then it's the question if Leclerc could've re-overtaken them, which I assume would've worked on Hulkenberg but not on Gasly, so it's the same end result. The SC put them in a difficult spot and it was probably hard to keep Gasly behind unless neither pitted or both pitted. At the time I wrote that post I of course wasn't as rational and was mainly afraid that despite Leclerc's awesome driving they were throwing a great result away.

 

 

I understand it was Leclerc's call, and that pitting could've also resulted in Gasly not pitting and Leclerc losing the position that way.

 

But on the statements about the softs, I disagree. When making the call for Leclerc, Ferrari did have the data from Vettel who switched to the softs on lap 42.

On lap 43 Vettel on softs set a 30.4. Gasly on softs drove a 30.1, 10 laps later on lap 53. Fuel corrected that meant that lap done by the Ferrari was quicker.

 

So I don't buy that they were necessarily so slow on softs. On high fuel yes, but on low fuel the car can drive very different. Don't forget Leclerc also qualified 4th on the softs in similar weather the day before.

That laptime from Vettel tells me that there was pace on softs for Ferrari, and had Leclerc and the drivers behind all pitted for softs, I'm sure Leclerc would've been able to keep P6.

 

How it now played out, I reckon they were lucky that there weren't other serious threats behind besides Gasly that could've made Leclerc lose even more places.

Hulkenberg wasn't race-fit. Had it been Perez or Stroll behind in that Racing Point I'm sure they would have overtaken Leclerc as well.

I was also worried that most of the soft-tyre runners would overtake him in the end but did not happen.

I agree with the rest of your post too, maybe he could have been able to keep Gasly behind if he had stopped for softs.

Without the SC he would have probably finished ahead of Gasly though.

Edited by FTB, 12 October 2020 - 20:27.

[Myrvold]

Who sets the sensor level? 

 

That, and what the sensor tolerance actually is. That... is a secret.

 

He was race director in v8 supercars.

 

IIRC, he was seen as a very good race director there. There was positives when he was announced. 

Then again, mostly-national tin-top racing is a bit different from F1.

[Celloman]

Who sets the sensor level? 

It doesn't matter as even a well calibrated sensor will always have to allow for some tolerance for cars moving on grid due to wind, when engaging the first gear, some minimal rolling on a banked start/finish straight, etc. In athletics running events they sometimes have to redo the start because a competitor triggered the sensor by moving minimally in the starting position, in an F1 race they cannot really afford to have "false" false starts.

 

Speaking of starts, I'm more curious about why the final red light sequence seems to be limited to one second at most these days.

Edited by Celloman, 13 October 2020 - 00:25.

[PlayboyRacer]

I was also worried that most of the soft-tyre runners would overtake him in the end but did not happen.
I agree with the rest of your post too, maybe he could have been able to keep Gasly behind if he had stopped for softs.
Without the SC he would have probably finished ahead of Gasly though.

He well and truly had Gasly covered without the SC. But you take the good, with the bad. 7th is a solid result from a car that was horrific on full tanks and soft tyres. He could have rolled the dice with another set of softs, this time on much lower fuel. But it was risky.

I think Leclerc played it well. Sometimes you just get the car home roughly where it should be and bank the points. Which is important - he's gunning for 6th in the WDC and what a result that would be. In this car that would be a sensational result.

[gillesfan76]

Ricciardo is a clear step above Bottas.

Max is. Leclerc is.

 

Comparing drivers across different teams/cars is anything but clear. Your opinion is not baseless and I can see the logic in it. But don’t try and package opinion as fact.

 

What is clear is that Lewis is a clear step above Bottas, as is Max over Albon and Leclerc over Seb.

[Requiem84]

So you get to determine what is clear and what is not?

Thats fascinating.

I think stating that Verstappen, Ricciardo and Leclerc are better than Bottas is... conservative to say the least.

[ARTGP]

Comparing drivers across different teams/cars is anything but clear. Your opinion is not baseless and I can see the logic in it. But don’t try and package opinion as fact.

 

What is clear is that Lewis is a clear step above Bottas, as is Max over Albon and Leclerc over Seb.

 

This is semantics though.....Which was never what the argument was in the first place.

 

What makes them better drivers is their racecraft which is visible regardless of the car you are driving. All of them are no doubt quick on a saturday.

 

They don't need to drive the same car before we can say MV,CL racecraft eats VB77 racecraft for lunch.

Edited by ARTGP, 14 October 2020 - 03:07.

[JeePee]

It doesn't matter as even a well calibrated sensor will always have to allow for some tolerance for cars moving on grid due to wind, when engaging the first gear, some minimal rolling on a banked start/finish straight, etc. In athletics running events they sometimes have to redo the start because a competitor triggered the sensor by moving minimally in the starting position, in an F1 race they cannot really afford to have "false" false starts.

 

Speaking of starts, I'm more curious about why the final red light sequence seems to be limited to one second at most these days.

They should just have a very 'trigger happy' sensor, and if it goes off, check the video footage afterwards. Our eyes have been proving more reliable then the sensors lately. Even Vettel once spotted a false start from Bottas from inside his car.

[Ultraviolet]

Ricciardo is a clear step above Bottas.

Max is. Leclerc is.

Before last year, I would have said Ricciardo is. But look at the driver ratings he scored last year. They are not a perfect guide, but they give a good indication over a season as to how well a driver is doing.

 

In 2018, Ricciardo was generally reckoned to be around the fifth best of the season, well ahead of Bottas.

 

https://forums.autos...gs#entry8615646

 

But last year, Ricciardo rated around 7th, with Bottas generally rated ahead of him. It was not a good season for him, by his standards.

 

https://forums.autos...19#entry8975347

 

So while I agree that Ricciardo might be as good as or even slightly better than Bottas, I remain to be convinced that there is much in it.

 

Leclerc seems to have the speed to beat Bottas, but even that is unproven. What he also has right now is a steep learning curve, on which he is still making too many mistakes to be regarded as better than Bottas. In a couple of years probably yes. Right now, no.

[Requiem84]

You just need to watch last Sunday where Bottas gave away the lead with an unforced error again..

When did Ricciardo ever made a similar mistake? How did Bottas manage to not-win in a Mercedes one year?

He’s strong on Saturday, but in the races he’s just a decent midfield driver.

[Marklar]

You just need to watch last Sunday where Bottas gave away the lead with an unforced error again..

When did Ricciardo ever made a similar mistake? How did Bottas manage to not-win in a Mercedes one year?

He’s strong on Saturday, but in the races he’s just a decent midfield driver.

how often was Ricciardo in such a situation? Until last race it never happened to Bottas either.

I yesterday finally managed to watch the first 35 laps I missed live and many drivers locked up there, including Max, this isnt proving anything at all.

Bottas is slower on race day than the drivers you mentioned based on the data we have so far, but him locking up and losing the lead has not much to do with.

[Requiem84]

how often was Ricciardo in such a situation? Until last race it never happened to Bottas either.

I yesterday finally managed to watch the first 35 laps I missed live and many drivers locked up there, including Max, this isnt proving anything at all.

Bottas is slower on race day than the drivers you mentioned based on the data we have so far, but him locking up and losing the lead has not much to do with.

 

Losing the lead to an unforced error is a very big thing, which you can't simply put under the carpet like it's business as usual.

 

It's not about locking up, it's about losing 1 second in a corner because the lock-up was so big that he completely missed the corner and allowed Hamilton to overtake. Max had a small lock up, but not all lock-ups are the same obviously as Max did not lose 1 second there. Small mistake vs big mistake. 

 

Bottas was hailed on Saturday and I already discussed with you on Saturday that on we'd all be forgotten Saturday after the Sunday race. Well, guess what happened 

[Marklar]

Losing the lead to an unforced error is a very big thing, which you can't simply put under the carpet like it's business as usual.

It's not about locking up, it's about losing 1 second in a corner because the lock-up was so big that he completely missed the corner and allowed Hamilton to overtake. Max had a small lock up, but not all lock-ups are the same obviously as Max did not lose 1 second there. Small mistake vs big mistake.

Bottas was hailed on Saturday and I already discussed with you on Saturday that on we'd all be forgotten Saturday after the Sunday race. Well, guess what happened

I'm not saying it was a small mistakes, but I dont see how it's a real pattern when it only happened once, and under very difficult conditions almost everyone struggled with.

In fact it's the one area in Bottas' driving on race day that is seen as a strong point of his. He is doing well in staying ahead under pressure, which is why he works so well in strategy games that have won his team mate some races.

[PayasYouRace]

You just need to watch last Sunday where Bottas gave away the lead with an unforced error again..

When did Ricciardo ever made a similar mistake? How did Bottas manage to not-win in a Mercedes one year?

He’s strong on Saturday, but in the races he’s just a decent midfield driver.

 

So many drivers made mistakes into Turn 1, why single out Bottas?

[Requiem84]

Again, a small lock-up (losing 2-3 tenths in T1) vs a massive lock-up / flat spot, losing 1 second in T1, losing the lead, isn't comparable. 

 

And I agree that the lock-up itself is not a Bottas-pattern, but being poor on Sundays in general is a very clear Bottas pattern. Be it a lack of racepace vs Hamilton (which on Sunday happens about 90% of the races), to being poor at L1 situations (Silverstone anyone?), to being poor at overtaking slower cars etc etc. 

 

It's part of the bigger Sunday picture, where Bottas has a hard time delivering. Due to the significant car advantage this weakness doesn't come up a lot this year, but it obviously is still there.

 

Which is similar to the RB issue: in 2017-2018 it didn't matter if Ricciardo lost 0,5 to Verstappen, he'd still be P6 because the midfield was so far away. If you now lose 0,5 to Verstappen, you have a good chance of missing Q3 or being at the back end of Q3. 

[Risil]

So you get to determine what is clear and what is not?

Thats fascinating.

I think stating that Verstappen, Ricciardo and Leclerc are better than Bottas is... conservative to say the least.

Gillesfan surely gets to determine what's clear and unclear to him.

[gillesfan76]

So you get to determine what is clear and what is not?

Thats fascinating.

I think stating that Verstappen, Ricciardo and Leclerc are better than Bottas is... conservative to say the least.

 

 

This is semantics though.....Which was never what the argument was in the first place.

 

What makes them better drivers is their racecraft which is visible regardless of the car you are driving. All of them are no doubt quick on a saturday.

 

They don't need to drive the same car before we can say MV,CL racecraft eats VB77 racecraft for lunch.

 

Go and watch Valtteri in earlier series. His racecraft was just fine. In fact, he beat Ricciardo competing in the same series.

 

Personally I too think that in Dan vs Valtteri that Dan will be quicker in races and better wheel to wheel, but I think he will be slightly slower in qualifying. In Leclerc vs Valtteri, I think Leclerc will be better in wheel to wheel but slower in qualifying and close in races.

 

Like I said, opinions are fine and I’m not criticising the opinion. But when people make claims like “clear” they’re trying to package a strong opinion as a fact. It’s not fact, stop pretending.

[shure]

Before last year, I would have said Ricciardo is. But look at the driver ratings he scored last year. They are not a perfect guide, but they give a good indication over a season as to how well a driver is doing.

 

In 2018, Ricciardo was generally reckoned to be around the fifth best of the season, well ahead of Bottas.

 

https://forums.autos...gs#entry8615646

 

But last year, Ricciardo rated around 7th, with Bottas generally rated ahead of him. It was not a good season for him, by his standards.

 

https://forums.autos...19#entry8975347

 

So while I agree that Ricciardo might be as good as or even slightly better than Bottas, I remain to be convinced that there is much in it.

 

Leclerc seems to have the speed to beat Bottas, but even that is unproven. What he also has right now is a steep learning curve, on which he is still making too many mistakes to be regarded as better than Bottas. In a couple of years probably yes. Right now, no.

yeah, but that's likely directly related to the fact that in 2018 he was in a front running car wile last year he moved to the midfield.  People at the front tend to be rated higher by default as their finishing positions influence judgement regardless of the impact their car has, so in turn having a good car gives an immediate ratings boost (unless you tank it like Albon, in which case it's the opposite).

[gillesfan76]

You just need to watch last Sunday where Bottas gave away the lead with an unforced error again..

When did Ricciardo ever made a similar mistake? How did Bottas manage to not-win in a Mercedes one year?

He’s strong on Saturday, but in the races he’s just a decent midfield driver.

 

When was Dan ever sat in a Mercedes trying to salvage his title hopes (futilely of course, but perhaps in his own mind he still had a chance) with a team mate like Lewis pressuring him. We’ve seen Rosberg make the same mistake, several times in fact. In fact in 2014, it was almost a safe bet that Nico would pole on Saturday and be overtaken on track on Sunday.

 

Valtteri is likely struggling mentally facing a team mate like Lewis. Probably not too dissimilar like Albon facing the same. It’s easy to compare a relatively carefree Ricciardo, away from pressures on all facets, performing at a high level against a Valtteri under pressure and getting exposed. Easy, but probably not fair. As I said, nothing is clear until they’re in the same car, same situation.

[Requiem84]

If that is your concept, we can only say one thing for certain:

 

Lewis Hamilton is only better than:

 

Heikki Kovailanen

Jenson Button (apart from 2011)

Nico Rosberg (apart from 2016)

and Valteri Bottas

 

I don't think one could seriously argue that these are the only drivers of which we clearly can say that Lewis Hamilton is better. Would you?

 

*I purposely left out Alonso as they tied on points.

[Ali623]

Go and watch Valtteri in earlier series. His racecraft was just fine. In fact, he beat Ricciardo competing in the same series.

 

Personally I too think that in Dan vs Valtteri that Dan will be quicker in races and better wheel to wheel, but I think he will be slightly slower in qualifying. In Leclerc vs Valtteri, I think Leclerc will be better in wheel to wheel but slower in qualifying and close in races.

 

Like I said, opinions are fine and I’m not criticising the opinion. But when people make claims like “clear” they’re trying to package a strong opinion as a fact. It’s not fact, stop pretending.

 

Disagree with that, I think there's a fair argument to say Leclerc is one of the best qualifiers (if not the best) on the grid.

[gillesfan76]

If that is your concept, we can only say one thing for certain:

 

Lewis Hamilton is only better than:

 

Heikki Kovailanen

Jenson Button (apart from 2011)

Nico Rosberg (apart from 2016)

and Valteri Bottas

 

I don't think one could seriously argue that these are the only drivers of which we clearly can say that Lewis Hamilton is better. Would you?

 

*I purposely left out Alonso as they tied on points.

 

Factually, yes. You can get some sort of reasonable comparison by looking at performances against various team mates, but that too is affected by variables. Right now we are seeing Leclerc destroying Vettel, but does that automatically make it clear (or even reasonable) to assume that Leclerc would have been a 4xWDC had he been in Mark Webber’s seat in those years? I personally would have no confidence whatsoever making that claim.

[gillesfan76]

Disagree with that, I think there's a fair argument to say Leclerc is one of the best qualifiers (if not the best) on the grid.

 

I agree with you that’s a fair argument. I don’t think he is, but it’s certainly a fair argument.

[noikeee]

Right now we are seeing Leclerc destroying Vettel, but does that automatically make it clear (or even reasonable) to assume that Leclerc would have been a 4xWDC had he been in Mark Webber’s seat in those years? I personally would have no confidence whatsoever making that claim.

Specially because he was 12 years old back in 2010. 

[Requiem84]

Factually, yes. You can get some sort of reasonable comparison by looking at performances against various team mates, but that too is affected by variables. Right now we are seeing Leclerc destroying Vettel, but does that automatically make it clear (or even reasonable) to assume that Leclerc would have been a 4xWDC had he been in Mark Webber’s seat in those years? I personally would have no confidence whatsoever making that claim.

 

I'll raise you on this.

 

Following your premises, I don't think you can factually say that driver x is better than driver y if he beat them in a certain team. After all, we don't know which driver get's the better parts, the better support, the better strategies. It's fully possible that there is inequality in certain teams which impacts the results of the drivers within the team.

 

So, following your framework, the conclusion is that we cannot say anything at all about which driver is better than another driver. 

[gillesfan76]

I'll raise you on this.

 

Following your premises, I don't think you can factually say that driver x is better than driver y if he beat them in a certain team. After all, we don't know which driver get's the better parts, the better support, the better strategies. It's fully possible that there is inequality in certain teams which impacts the results of the drivers within the team.

 

So, following your framework, the conclusion is that we cannot say anything at all about which driver is better than another driver. 

 

I generally don’t believe in any intentional inequality for the sake of it. I don’t discount that drivers could get treated differently, but in all cases it’s down to performance. The team will back their main horse. They don’t spend hundreds of millions of dollars to screw their chances by getting behind a lesser driver.

 

But yes I can agree with you that if the performance differences are small, and the sample of years is small, then it’s far from conclusive which driver is better simply based on points or finishing positions. But when one driver beats another 75% of the time over numerous seasons and by notable margins, then I consider it factual.

 

Neither does it have to be stagnant. Was Jenson a better driver than Lewis in 2011? While he wasn’t as quick over a lap, as a race driver I think it is factual to say that yes Jenson was better than Lewis in 2011.

[ARTGP]

If that is your concept, we can only say one thing for certain:

 

Lewis Hamilton is only better than:

 

Heikki Kovailanen

Jenson Button (apart from 2011)

Nico Rosberg (apart from 2016)

and Valteri Bottas

 

I don't think one could seriously argue that these are the only drivers of which we clearly can say that Lewis Hamilton is better. Would you?

 

*I purposely left out Alonso as they tied on points.

 

 

That's quite the revision to history   

[Requiem84]

I generally don’t believe in any intentional inequality for the sake of it. I don’t discount that drivers could get treated differently, but in all cases it’s down to performance. The team will back their main horse. They don’t spend hundreds of millions of dollars to screw their chances by getting behind a lesser driver.

 

But yes I can agree with you that if the performance differences are small, and the sample of years is small, then it’s far from conclusive which driver is better simply based on points or finishing positions. But when one driver beats another 75% of the time over numerous seasons and by notable margins, then I consider it factual.

 

Neither does it have to be stagnant. Was Jenson a better driver than Lewis in 2011? While he wasn’t as quick over a lap, as a race driver I think it is factual to say that yes Jenson was better than Lewis in 2011.

 

That's a bit odd. First you want things to be factual, and once it comes down to facts we don't know, you ignore the blanks. 

 

For instance, is it coincidence that Stroll is so much stronger this year vs Perez compared to the year before? Was the difference between Ricciardo and Vettel really that big in 2014, or did RB slowly stopped focussing on Vettel (same at Ferrari in 2020). 

 

How would 2007 have went if Mclaren had focused on 1 driver instead of 2, would we now then have said that either Alonso or Hamilton would have been the stronger one? 

 

I think if you want go for the 'factual' approach, one should be aware of all intra-team facts. Which by definition is not possible to know from the outside (and perhaps also not from the inside). So that would make it impossible to say who is better. 

 

I don't think this is a fair approach. As for the vast majority of people following F1, it is very clear for instance that Verstappen is a better driver than Bottas. 

[SenorSjon]

Specially because he was 12 years old back in 2010. 

 

Funny when you think of this. He was 7 when Alonso became champion and they will be racing each other next year.

[gillesfan76]

That's a bit odd. First you want things to be factual, and once it comes down to facts we don't know, you ignore the blanks. 

 

For instance, is it coincidence that Stroll is so much stronger this year vs Perez compared to the year before? Was the difference between Ricciardo and Vettel really that big in 2014, or did RB slowly stopped focussing on Vettel (same at Ferrari in 2020). 

 

How would 2007 have went if Mclaren had focused on 1 driver instead of 2, would we now then have said that either Alonso or Hamilton would have been the stronger one? 

 

I think if you want go for the 'factual' approach, one should be aware of all intra-team facts. Which by definition is not possible to know from the outside (and perhaps also not from the inside). So that would make it impossible to say who is better. 

 

I don't think this is a fair approach. As for the vast majority of people following F1, it is very clear for instance that Verstappen is a better driver than Bottas. 

 

What are you talking about? You created this new unknown about the possibility of a team favouring a lesser driver. It’s not MY unknown, it’s YOUR unknown. What next? You want to consider the possibility that one driver could possibly be getting an unfair advantage from an supernatural spirit?

 

If you want to believe in those possibilities, go for it but leave me out of it. I’ll just stick to the facts, team mates is the best comparison you’re going to get. And when that comparison is over a number our seasons, and the performance differential is notable, then I consider it a fact. For me, it doesn’t have to become a lab experiment with double-blind studies and controls to be ascertained as a fact, but neither can it be some speculative bullsh*t of drivers in different cars, none having shared team mates yet we want to claim it’s clear that one is better than the other. In my opinion, if Ricciardo was clearly better (as opposed to being maybe probably better) than he’d be sat in that Mercedes rather than the Renault. Even the team principals haven’t always rated Ricciardo above Valtteri. So the only thing that is clear, is that the jury is out.

[Requiem84]

Ah, so you don't want to find facts, but you want to find your facts. That is good to know then . 

 

Regarding Ricciardo not being in a Mercedes, I see it's again your 'facts', because Mercedes might not necessarily want the best driver in the 2nd seat at all. 

[gillesfan76]

Ah, so you don't want to find facts, but you want to find your facts. That is good to know then . 

 

Regarding Ricciardo not being in a Mercedes, I see it's again your 'facts', because Mercedes might not necessarily want the best driver in the 2nd seat at all. 

 

I’m not saying that you have to consider MY fact as YOUR fact. I think it’s complete nonsense that teams would favour their lesser driver, so it’s not even a factor in my consideration. I look at two drivers, in the same team, and consider them driving more or less equal machinery over many races. When I see one beating the other by a statistically significant margin, I’m happy to consider it fact that up to that point in time, that driver is the better one.

 

If you believe that there is a possibility that the much slower driver is actually the faster one, over all those many races, and that the team is favouring his team mate who isn’t actually 3 tenths a lap slower on average over all those many races, I have no problem with you not considering it as fact.

 

But it is quite funny, a moment ago you were quite happy to consider it as fact that three drivers in different cars are all better than the fourth driver driving for the best team. Yet now you’re arguing that it’s not even a fact that Max is better than Albon. Luckily your profession isn’t a defence lawyer! 

[Requiem84]

I’m not saying that you have to consider MY fact as YOUR fact. I think it’s complete nonsense that teams would favour their lesser driver, so it’s not even a factor in my consideration. I look at two drivers, in the same team, and consider them driving more or less equal machinery over many races. When I see one beating the other by a statistically significant margin, I’m happy to consider it fact that up to that point in time, that driver is the better one.

If you believe that there is a possibility that the much slower driver is actually the faster one, over all those many races, and that the team is favouring his team mate who isn’t actually 3 tenths a lap slower on average over all those many races, I have no problem with you not considering it as fact.

But it is quite funny, a moment ago you were quite happy to consider it as fact that three drivers in different cars are all better than the fourth driver driving for the best team. Yet now you’re arguing that it’s not even a fact that Max is better than Albon. Luckily your profession isn’t a defence lawyer!

Hang on, I only said that following your logic it’s impossible to argue that Verstappen is better than Albon, because it’s entirely unclear to what extent teams can provide full equality, and your premises relies on this.

So on the hand you refuse any comparisons between drivers from different teams, because there is no objective factual comparison possible, but when for team mates you are happy to assume they are treated equally.

That’s not really consistent, one the hand looking for facts and the other hand happy to make assumptions.

But good to know that going forward you will not make any driver comparisons if the drivers drive for different teams. I guess it’s a helpful that I’m actually a lawyer after all :-).

[PayasYouRace]

I’m not saying ...

 

 

Hang on, ...

 

I don't know what you two are even arguing about but it's clearly not anything to do with the Eifel Grand Prix.