646 replies to this topic

[kumo7]

My quick tally, setting trendlines from last 7 races - ie once Max stopped winning - has:

MV: 407 (+94)
LN: 365 (+110)
OP: 346 (+123)
CL: 339 (+104)

If you give Max a lower estimate and others a higher estimate:
MV: 388
LN: 387
CL: 373
OP: 353

Don't know why Excel's confidence variance between LN & OP is so different, perhaps it knows Oscar would need to cede position!

what about this ? is this a prediction or the recent past?

[1player]

The way it’s going, Oscar will be leading in Singapore, ready to lift for Norris but Norris will be battling with a fast charging Max and they both crash out.

Then you have Oscar only 6 points behind Lando with 6+3 to go. Could be a cracker on a run in

As the kids say these days, lay down the hopium pipe, you've been going pretty hard at it. In the other thread you said you never know if Norris is gonna crash out in formation lap... I'm not sure we are even watching the same sport ;)

I find it fascinating how some of you can't stop fantasizing about Norris having a terrible weekend. I wish all Piastri fans were as measured as Gambelli

Edited by 1player, 18 September 2024 - 19:07.

[MikeTekRacing]

As the kids say these days, lay down the hopium pipe, you've been going pretty hard at it. In the other thread you said you never know if Norris is gonna crash out in formation lap... I'm not sure we are even watching the same sport ;)

I find it fascinating how some of you can't stop fantasizing about Norris having a terrible weekend. I wish all Piastri fans were as measured as Gambelli

Norris having a terrible weekend?

it depends what you mean by terrible. only winning twice with that car is pretty terrible. 

[baddog]

So logical to say Norris isn't a wdc contender...  ok then.   

 

Of course he is a contender, but it is getting to time that he and his race team have to make his WDC challenge happen in fact not just in unconverted pace.

[mclarensmps]

Too bad the WDC will not be decided based on the last 7 races/last 9 races only.

[baddog]

Too bad the WDC will not be decided based on the last 7 races/last 9 races only.

 

Nor on the first 8-10

 

The next 7 are the interesting ones 

[MikeTekRacing]

The team orders conversation started in Hungary.

How do the numbers look now vs then.

Then: post Hungary there were 11 races to go, 76 points gap, needs 6.9 per race.

Now: post Baku there are 7 races to go, 59 point gap, needs 8.4 per race.

 

In between them he made 4.25 points per race.

 

This is not enough and he is getting further, not closer to the WDC

[dave34m]

Yep, it was a long shot before and slightly more of a long shot now but he still has a chance so the team is absolutely correct in pushing for it, as has been pointed out so many times before these opportunities don't come along very often.

[Brawn BGP 001]

This thread makes me sure glad I aint a driver fan anymore, man so much mental gymnastics. 

[Mc_Silver]

This thread makes me sure glad I aint a driver fan anymore, man so much mental gymnastics.

This.

[Sterzo]

Here's why I think orders are a mistake. Let's say Piastri leads Norris then Verstappen, with gaps of a few seconds. You slow down Piastri for Norris to pass so Piastri can defend him. Then a VSC or other delay occurs, Verstappen pits and undercuts both McLarens instead of one.

 

It may seem like a convoluted example, but the real point is: you don't know what's going to happen, and "team orders" equals slowing someone down, which exposes that car to unnecessary risk. To justify that, you must have a really, really strong reason, with your WDC contender on the cusp of taking the championship. And Norris isn't.

[BillBald]

Here's why I think orders are a mistake. Let's say Piastri leads Norris then Verstappen, with gaps of a few seconds. You slow down Piastri for Norris to pass so Piastri can defend him. Then a VSC or other delay occurs, Verstappen pits and undercuts both McLarens instead of one.

 

It may seem like a convoluted example, but the real point is: you don't know what's going to happen, and "team orders" equals slowing someone down, which exposes that car to unnecessary risk. To justify that, you must have a really, really strong reason, with your WDC contender on the cusp of taking the championship. And Norris isn't.

 

This sounds like a pretty clear case where the team should not use team orders.

 

Monza on the other hand, was a case where lack of team orders gave Leclerc the win.

 

Nobody is asking McLaren to be stupid (they can often manage that without any encouragement).

[JeanAlesi27]

Here's why I think orders are a mistake. Let's say Piastri leads Norris then Verstappen, with gaps of a few seconds. You slow down Piastri for Norris to pass so Piastri can defend him. Then a VSC or other delay occurs, Verstappen pits and undercuts both McLarens instead of one.

 

It may seem like a convoluted example, but the real point is: you don't know what's going to happen, and "team orders" equals slowing someone down, which exposes that car to unnecessary risk. To justify that, you must have a really, really strong reason, with your WDC contender on the cusp of taking the championship. And Norris isn't.

 

I can't see any team on the grid swapping in this scenario unless the trailing car is showing obvious speed over P1. A swap,  if Piastri is still faster would only come at the end of the race when it is less likely to cause an issue..     

[Mc_Silver]

Here's why I think orders are a mistake. Let's say Piastri leads Norris then Verstappen, with gaps of a few seconds. You slow down Piastri for Norris to pass so Piastri can defend him. Then a VSC or other delay occurs, Verstappen pits and undercuts both McLarens instead of one.

It may seem like a convoluted example, but the real point is: you don't know what's going to happen, and "team orders" equals slowing someone down, which exposes that car to unnecessary risk. To justify that, you must have a really, really strong reason, with your WDC contender on the cusp of taking the championship. And Norris isn't.

You are talking about a very specific situation which doesn't have anything to do with the rationale of the thread.

[JeanAlesi27]

 

it depends what you mean by terrible. only winning twice with that car is pretty terrible. 

 

Both Mclarens have 2 wins.  

[le chat noir]

As the kids say these days, lay down the hopium pipe, you've been going pretty hard at it. In the other thread you said you never know if Norris is gonna crash out in formation lap... I'm not sure we are even watching the same sport ;)

I find it fascinating how some of you can't stop fantasizing about Norris having a terrible weekend. I wish all Piastri fans were as measured as Gambelli

 
You misunderstood my point. It was a comparison to DC. DC did crash out on formation laps, and hit the pit wall. It was a comparison of confidence in drivers. No reason to doubt Piastri in a race context. Lando goes backwards at the starts every time. Whether the yellow flag was something he could have controlled - everyone says not, yet he was the only driver that should have been through Q3 affected by it - these incidents continually happen to him. See spinning in the wet etc. Piastri goes forwards, and is usually only shuffled back by the team prioritising Norris - whether that's upgrades or strategy.
 

Here's why I think orders are a mistake. Let's say Piastri leads Norris then Verstappen, with gaps of a few seconds. You slow down Piastri for Norris to pass so Piastri can defend him. Then a VSC or other delay occurs, Verstappen pits and undercuts both McLarens instead of one.
 
It may seem like a convoluted example, but the real point is: you don't know what's going to happen, and "team orders" equals slowing someone down, which exposes that car to unnecessary risk. To justify that, you must have a really, really strong reason, with your WDC contender on the cusp of taking the championship. And Norris isn't.

 
Swapping positions should only happen at the end of the race IMO. Other than that it's about racing clever.
 

Both Mclarens have 2 wins.

 
Both drivers haven't had the same car throughout, nor been given the same strategic options. The whole season has already been biased to Norris throughout. The only things they haven't done is swap a couple of positions.

And if those positions had been swapped and Norris was 11 points more to the good, he'd still need 6.9 points per race, just has he did after Hungary.

 

 

The nuanced position is fine though. It's working for both of them. But I'd be aghast if they start playing games with anywhere more than 90 distance covered.

[sgtkate]

Lando and Max can't be in the same sentence. Lando made more mistakes and left more points on the table this year than Max over the past 5 seasons. 

Lando won a race with a lucky SC (after a bad qualy) and a race with the fastest car (easily gapped Max to 22s)

that's it. he made a mess out of the rest of the chances he had in the best car on the grid. 

A much younger team mate is collecting more points than him over the last stretch of races. Since the team orders conversation started in Hungary Lando is asserting himself as the no 2 in the team

It's been literally one race. This is ridiculous. 

[JeanAlesi27]

   

Both drivers haven't had the same car throughout, nor been given the same strategic options. The whole season has already been biased to Norris throughout. The only things they haven't done is swap a couple of positions.  

 

I don't agree with that statement "the whole season"  -  meanwhile you've missed the original posters intention which was to diminish Norris with the 2 victories BS.

[Gareth]

It's been literally one race. This is ridiculous. 

100%.

 

I've enjoyed the "let's pick an arbitrary number of historic races, and project those same results forward" calculations the most.

 

How about we pick the biggest sample size of races together we have, 39 races. That gives:

 

Lando - 459

Oscar - 319

 

(I wouldn't project that forward either, for various reasons, but if we're doing arbitrary periods we could at least pick our biggest sample, right ... ?)

[MikeTekRacing]

It's been literally one race. This is ridiculous. 

say what?

there were 4 races since Hungary. 

Norris was dominant in Zandvoort and behind in Spa, Monza and Baku.

What do you mean by 1 race?

 

100%.

 

I've enjoyed the "let's pick an arbitrary number of historic races, and project those same results forward" calculations the most.

 

How about we pick the biggest sample size of races together we have, 39 races. That gives:

 

Lando - 459

Oscar - 319

 

(I wouldn't project that forward either, for various reasons, but if we're doing arbitrary periods we could at least pick our biggest sample, right ... ?)

Lando has more points over the year.

The conversation was that he should have been no 1 in Hungary and given a win for free as he his the leader - he has not made more progress vs Max, nor asserted himself as the better driver of the team.

Pressure is on since he the car is capable to wins and I can't see him stepping up. He is fast but the results don't show it. 

[le chat noir]

I don't agree with that statement "the whole season" - meanwhile you've missed the original posters intention which was to diminish Norris with the 2 victories BS.

Has there been any moment this year where Norris’ race chances were reduced to boost Piastri’s?

Big song and dance about handing back position having had the undercut. And a handful of corners in Baku holding up Perez that had no material affect on finishing position.

Every other moment where one had to receive an advantage as only one set of parts or one pit box has gone to Norris throughout the season.

[le chat noir]

100%.

I've enjoyed the "let's pick an arbitrary number of historic races, and project those same results forward" calculations the most.

How about we pick the biggest sample size of races together we have, 39 races. That gives:

Lando - 459
Oscar - 319

(I wouldn't project that forward either, for various reasons, but if we're doing arbitrary periods we could at least pick our biggest sample, right ... ?)

They aren’t arbitrary, they’re from a point where the car performances shifted away from Red Bull.


Piastri isn’t in the title fight. The comparison though shows that Piastri has executed better since the car performance swing, despite not always playing on a level field. That’s not an indication that he should have TO preference. Just answers the thread questions - is there a title fight? Not in any meaningful sense. Should they issue TOs? Not unless one or other is holding the other up or to achieve the best team result. Prioritising one driver over the other is not warranted.

Verstappen could do a Schumacher 99 on Sunday and we’d be missing out on a humdinger. How flat would it be if Piastri pulled over every week. That’s nothing to celebrate.

Should team tactics be used, like in Baku, like AD21 etc? Always.

[mclarensmps]

100%.

 

I've enjoyed the "let's pick an arbitrary number of historic races, and project those same results forward" calculations the most.

 

How about we pick the biggest sample size of races together we have, 39 races. That gives:

 

Lando - 459

Oscar - 319

 

(I wouldn't project that forward either, for various reasons, but if we're doing arbitrary periods we could at least pick our biggest sample, right ... ?)

 

Let's go even better. In the last race, Piastri only moved up 1 place during the race, and Lando moved up 13  . 

[Gareth]

They aren’t arbitrary, they’re from a point where the car performances shifted away from Red Bull.

Very true. Everyone knows that "how many points you scored when the car performance shifted away from Red Bull" is a highly accurate guide to future performance and not an arbitrary cut off at all, whereas "how many points you scored in all races together" is not.

[Mc_Silver]

Has there been any moment this year where Norris’ race chances were reduced to boost Piastri’s?

Big song and dance about handing back position having had the undercut. And a handful of corners in Baku holding up Perez that had no material affect on finishing position.

Every other moment where one had to receive an advantage as only one set of parts or one pit box has gone to Norris throughout the season.

lol

[le chat noir]

Very true. Everyone knows that "how many points you scored when the car performance shifted away from Red Bull" is a highly accurate guide to future performance and not an arbitrary cut off at all, whereas "how many points you scored in all races together" is not.

Is Driver A in the title fight?

Your answer appears to be that Driver B has scored more points since the season began. We cannot consider whether driver A’s current rate is higher than Driver B’s, so we must answer no.


While the McLaren team and all the media are suggesting that Driver B’s rate has dropped and Driver A’s if he can find consistency, is greater, and that the difference is small enough that these changes in rate suggest Driver A may overcome Driver B.

That’s literally the whole point of the championship. Otherwise it would be 1 race and we’d crown the WDC because rate accrual can’t change.


What fun for you.

[le chat noir]

lol

It was hardly Perez x Hamilton stuff now was it.

Or Magnusson x the field

Edited by le chat noir, 19 September 2024 - 17:57.

[kumo7]

i have been sick so i was not here. i see that you are all failing to see the point. it is about McLaren taking both WDC and WCC this year.
i do not hesitate to say that all what Norris do is to win all races from now on to shut the critic up.
Tabloid like critics are toxic.

Edited by kumo7, 19 September 2024 - 18:07.

[Anderis]

Here's why I think orders are a mistake. Let's say Piastri leads Norris then Verstappen, with gaps of a few seconds. You slow down Piastri for Norris to pass so Piastri can defend him. Then a VSC or other delay occurs, Verstappen pits and undercuts both McLarens instead of one.

 

It may seem like a convoluted example, but the real point is: you don't know what's going to happen, and "team orders" equals slowing someone down, which exposes that car to unnecessary risk. To justify that, you must have a really, really strong reason, with your WDC contender on the cusp of taking the championship. And Norris isn't.

I think in such cases it is about:

1. probability

2. best case scenario

 

1. There may be risks to the TO backfiring but if it's 50% chance it wins you 7 points, 45% chance it makes no difference and 5% chance it loses you 10 points, you should still probably go for it.

2. Since Norris is the one who needs to close the gap you sometimes have to target the best case scenario because it's the only scenario that gives any WDC chances in the first place. If "safe" scenario makes Norris end up 20 points behind at the end of the season and risky one has 20% chance of Norris ending up 5 points ahead and 80% chance of ending up 100 points behind, you should still take the "risky" one, even though it's mathematically suboptimal, shouldn't you? Because how does it matter if you made things worse if the safe scenario was never good enough to win anyway?

 

"Don't do anything that has the slightest potential to backfire" is not the most effective and rational course of action most of the time. In most areas, it's impossible to achieve success while avoiding all actions that have potential to make something worse.

[Gareth]

That’s literally the whole point of the championship. Otherwise it would be 1 race and we’d crown the WDC because rate accrual can’t change.


What fun for you.

You didn’t read the small print on my first post, did you?

[baddog]

Very true. Everyone knows that "how many points you scored when the car performance shifted away from Red Bull" is a highly accurate guide to future performance and not an arbitrary cut off at all, whereas "how many points you scored in all races together" is not.

 

Absolutely true that Norris has the best record over their time in the team together, and also still has the lead over this season.

 

However form is a very real thing and Oscar's recent form is obviously better than it was earlier, and Lando's is not really. Recent trends are very informative regarding driver form, taking the whole period is not.

 

An actual valid counter-argument is that Lando's driving form has in fact been good just the results haven't come for various reasons. They need to start coming this weekend though, I think you would agree?

[Sterzo]

I think in such cases it is about:

1. probability

2. best case scenario

I agree with this, and indeed with the logic in the rest of your post. Maybe where we differ is in our assessment of the probability, and our view of what level of probability is "enough" to justify switching on team orders.

[RPM40]

Very true. Everyone knows that "how many points you scored when the car performance shifted away from Red Bull" is a highly accurate guide to future performance and not an arbitrary cut off at all, whereas "how many points you scored in all races together" is not.

 

I think it has largely been offset by Piastri's improvement rate. I would agree that season long points are far more important, but the thing that has become evident this season is Piastri's overall performance, especially at race management and tyre deg has taken a fairly sharp improvement as the season has gone on. Early in the year he was still struggling with tyre deg quite significantly while now, while maybe not quite to the level of Norris he is generally there or there abouts and is not constantly suffering that late stint falloff.

 

So comparing the points score from the mid season point does make sense in this case as you're comparing with an inexperienced driver who is still rapidly improving.

[RPM40]

i have been sick so i was not here. i see that you are all failing to see the point. it is about McLaren taking both WDC and WCC this year.
i do not hesitate to say that all what Norris do is to win all races from now on to shut the critic up.
Tabloid like critics are toxic.

 

 

Of course, Norris winning every single race would make his life easier, but its a peculiar thing to say about a driver who has won 1 in the last 10 races when having generally the best car over that time. Of course the simplest solution for McLaren is to win every race....

[kumo7]

Of course, Norris winning every single race would make his life easier, but its a peculiar thing to say about a driver who has won 1 in the last 10 races when having generally the best car over that time. Of course the simplest solution for McLaren is to win every race....

 

your opinion is solely based on the point that Oscar win the WDC, with any costs, if I am not mistaken. This is what I say toxic. Some do say McLaren can go bust as long as Oscar wins the title, which is wauy too much.

[miso]

your opinion is solely based on the point that Oscar win the WDC, with any costs, if I am not mistaken. This is what I say toxic. Some do say McLaren can go bust as long as Oscar wins the title, which is wauy too much.

Where had anybody said anything like that?

[RPM40]

your opinion is solely based on the point that Oscar win the WDC, with any costs, if I am not mistaken. This is what I say toxic. Some do say McLaren can go bust as long as Oscar wins the title, which is wauy too much.

What I said has nothing of the sorts? Just to go from a recent 10% win rate to a 100% win rate of course would be optimistic.

Of course the goal should be for a 100% Mclaren win rate, not favoring which driver has achieved it. Nothing about that is “toxic” as you described.

[baddog]

Where had anybody said anything like that?

 

No-one has said anything even a tiny bit like that. But it is much easier to set a straw man ablaze than a a real one.

[kumo7]

Where had anybody said anything like that?

there was this discussions between southersstars, and later southernstars said some sort. i have to search this thread. it was some days a go.

[kumo7]

No-one has said anything even a tiny bit like that. But it is much easier to set a straw man ablaze than a a real one.

well you jump on and make me a one that make a straw man ablaze than a real one. this is also toxic.
you know nothing but act like you know everything. good timing for you to go read socrates i say.

[kumo7]

I am still looking for this conversation. but, I can tell you the context. When Oscar overtook Norris but he was not quick enough to win the race. this situation has a lot of takes as the move was a bit of sensation. Piastri fans only praised his man and McLaren fans said 1-2 was lost.
this is what I say “at any cost” you might not have said directly, because spelling it out in full words and sentence needs a bit of balls to take blame and explain the reason so that the statement is based on the solid ground.

Any ways all in all, I am saying that Norris prefers to go racing against Piastri, while a fan like me is saying that McLaren to go WDC for the sake of the past 14 years of development, 1000 workers, all sorrows, to mark the new McLaren in style. To me it is a kick off point and the end of the suffering. I love to see two drivers go freely go racing with the knowledge that it won the titles and terminated the period.
Again, if Norris wanted to go free racing, then that is Ok for me as long as he wins all races from now on and achieve the goal.

[baddog]

well you jump on and make me a one that make a straw man ablaze than a real one. this is also toxic.
you know nothing but act like you know everything. good timing for you to go read socrates i say.

 

That would be quite a trick, as no part of Socrates' writing survives. If you do want to discuss ancient Greek philosophy I am very much the right person to talk to, but this is not perhaps the place for it.

 

To return to today, posting reframed misrepresentations of another poster's comments which you then demolish is literally what a strawman argument is and there is nothing wrong or rude about pointing that out.

 

Saying 'you know nothing but act like you know everything' is just personally insulting. After that, accusing people of being 'toxic', is a bit of a stretch to be honest. 

 

The silly thing is that any actual disagreements are minor and shouldn't need to become abrasive arguments at all. We are all real fans of this sport.

[kumo7]

That would be quite a trick, as no part of Socrates' writing survives. If you do want to discuss ancient Greek philosophy I am very much the right person to talk to, but this is not perhaps the place for it.

To return to today, posting reframed misrepresentations of another poster's comments which you then demolish is literally what a strawman argument is and there is nothing wrong or rude about pointing that out.

Saying 'you know nothing but act like you know everything' is just personally insulting. After that, accusing people of being 'toxic', is a bit of a stretch to be honest.

The silly thing is that any actual disagreements are minor and shouldn't need to become abrasive arguments at all. We are all real fans of this sport.

i give you right to say so as you claim you are trained to talk about Greek knowledge.
But w what I am saying is that you would not know everything about what had been discussed in this thread? if you would have know then you know what i am talking about, and if you are not ignoring what i say, then you will say something other than i am using the argument. pls do not bring in any stratosphere of a personal insult as it closes any arguments or conversation in this thread. obviously it takes two to tango and you might not be fully immune.

Edited by kumo7, Yesterday, 08:13.

[Rocket73]

The team orders conversation started in Hungary.

How do the numbers look now vs then.

Then: post Hungary there were 11 races to go, 76 points gap, needs 6.9 per race.

Now: post Baku there are 7 races to go, 59 point gap, needs 8.4 per race.

 

In between them he made 4.25 points per race.

 

This is not enough and he is getting further, not closer to the WDC

You could then argue that if team orders had been enforced in Hungary Lando would have gained 7 points there and 10 points in Monza.

 

Which means a 42 point gap and 6 per race to win the WDC.

 

Cruising it basically

[Clrnc]

At the f1 fans meet and greet now and Oscar just personally thanked Norris for the great team work in Baku.

"Without him I would probably not have won so thank you Mr Norris".

When asked about what's his favorite moment in Baku Norris said, :"Overtaking Max. Obviously I would love to have been racing at the front with Oscar but the yellow flags was just unlucky. We will have plenty of opportunities."

Vibe seems brilliant between the 2.

[kumo7]

At the f1 fans meet and greet now and Oscar just personally thanked Norris for the great team work in Baku.

"Without him I would probably not have won so thank you Mr Norris".

When asked about what's his favorite moment in Baku Norris said, :"Overtaking Max. Obviously I would love to have been racing at the front with Oscar but the yellow flags was just unlucky. We will have plenty of opportunities."

Vibe seems brilliant between the 2.

great. great.

[FirstnameLastname]

I’ve decided to base the WDC on how many points they scored in the 2003 championship

Alonso wins on 55 points, everyone else scores ZERO