planetf1.com

Now then, there's plenty of discussion around the title this year as it seems we have a 2 team fight for the title, the first in a while. For me Hamilton or vettel will win the WDC , no disrespect intended to kimi and Bottas, I just don't think they'll have the pace at enough weekends to come out on top vs their team mates (I know strange things do happen though - rosberg title )

For me this season is going to be a legacy defining season for both Hamilton and vettel. It will to some extent solidify one of them as the best of this era. For purposes of this discussions let's just imagine alonso didn't exist ok! Another note - I know alot can happen after this season eggs. Vettel wins 2017 then Hamilton takes the following year. Even if one of the cars ends up with a slight but clear performance advantage I feel that won't be remembered in terms of separating the 2 drivers.

Does anyone else think that Hamilton is going to utterly welt under Vettel's consistency? My opinion has always been Hamilton is slightly quicker (.070 seconds - 0.1) than vettel. Relative to that I felt Hamilton was (0.1 to 0.2) quicker than Rosberg. Hamilton has in the last couple of years had "runs" , but that was in the rocket ship. He's now in a rocket ship vs a rocket ship with vettel in there. I appreciate vettel also had his "runs" in a rocket ship but it wasn't as fast a rocket ship !

One of three things will happen this year

1) Hamilton runs vettel close but ultimately loses out due to inferior consistency vs vettel ie. More Sochi type weekends
2) Hamilton over the next 8 races has a number of incidents and/or poor weekends resulting in pressure from bottas, and ultimately loses the WDC by a mile and only just pips bottas to 2nd place.
3) Mercedes across the season generate a clear advantage and Hamilton takes the title. In the first 2 scenarios the Ferrari and Merc stay relatively even performance wise.

I am a brit and a massive LH fan so it pains me to say this but this is my view on how the season will end up.

What's others thoughts , I know there are alot of variables but all things being equal do you agree on the speed vs consistency piece or am I being unfair to either one driver?

My thoughts are that it's just another season and more will follow and Hamilton and Vettel will likely be featuring in those seasons. I see this more likely as a beginning rather than a culmination and final destination point for legacy.

In 5 years, we'll have a clearer idea of who is better.

I thought I'd put in enough caveat's to prevent fence sitting I obviously missed one

My opinion is that Hamilton is better at being there or thereabouts the ultimate pace of the car, and generally seems to be better at extracting a quick lap (though Sochi would have you believe otherwise). On the other hand, I feel Vettel has a higher "ultimate pace" threshold than Hamilton, but needs the car to be hooked up - in a car he's happy with, he's near unbeatable.

The title this season will depend on 2 factors IMO:
1. Consistency of upgrades (Mercedes have an upper hand over Ferrari here, given past record)
2. Consistency of the drivers (I think Vettel edges Hamilton here - Lewis has one too many forgettable weekends to go along with his flashes of brilliance)

Ultimately though, in the eyes of the people who watched this era, Alonso will probably go down as the greatest of his generation. For future fans, it might just be a case of who has better numbers between the three of them (and Alonso will always lose out there).

Andy2402 wrote:Now then, there's plenty of discussion around the title this year as it seems we have a 2 team fight for the title, the first in a while. For me Hamilton or vettel will win the WDC , no disrespect intended to kimi and Bottas, I just don't think they'll have the pace at enough weekends to come out on top vs their team mates (I know strange things do happen though - rosberg title )

For me this season is going to be a legacy defining season for both Hamilton and vettel. It will to some extent solidify one of them as the best of this era. For purposes of this discussions let's just imagine alonso didn't exist ok! Another note - I know alot can happen after this season eggs. Vettel wins 2017 then Hamilton takes the following year. Even if one of the cars ends up with a slight but clear performance advantage I feel that won't be remembered in terms of separating the 2 drivers.

Does anyone else think that Hamilton is going to utterly welt under Vettel's consistency? My opinion has always been Hamilton is slightly quicker (.070 seconds - 0.1) than vettel. Relative to that I felt Hamilton was (0.1 to 0.2) quicker than Rosberg. Hamilton has in the last couple of years had "runs" , but that was in the rocket ship. He's now in a rocket ship vs a rocket ship with vettel in there. I appreciate vettel also had his "runs" in a rocket ship but it wasn't as fast a rocket ship !

One of three things will happen this year

1) Hamilton runs vettel close but ultimately loses out due to inferior consistency vs vettel ie. More Sochi type weekends
2) Hamilton over the next 8 races has a number of incidents and/or poor weekends resulting in pressure from bottas, and ultimately loses the WDC by a mile and only just pips bottas to 2nd place.
3) Mercedes across the season generate a clear advantage and Hamilton takes the title. In the first 2 scenarios the Ferrari and Merc stay relatively even performance wise.

I am a brit and a massive LH fan so it pains me to say this but this is my view on how the season will end up.

What's others thoughts , I know there are alot of variables but all things being equal do you agree on the speed vs consistency piece or am I being unfair to either one driver?

Once upon a time I would have agreed but I think Hamilton has shown he is consistent enough over the past few years. He's strung quite a few wins together.

Hamilton has 2-3 tracks on the calendar that he just isn't as strong at, Brazil and Japan being the prime examples. He can also have the odd bad weekend a couple of times per season but every top driver has that. Berger did it so Senna on occasion, Barrichello to Schumacher and Fisichella to Alonso too.

I don't think this season will define the two as a fight between the them but its more about how they do against their team mates. Hamilton could go down a peg if Bottas runs him really close in points (genuinely, not through reliability or something) but Vettel I see it as a win-win year for him in terms of legacy as he easily has Kimi covered.

Whilst Hamilton has the odd bad weekend every season and he had his awful second half to 2011 (mostly collisions) Vettel has also had a small dip in the middle of 2010 (only 3 races), around the middle of 2012, pretty much all of 2014 and parts of 2016. The only seasons he stayed at the top level all year were 2011, 2013 and 2015.

I think Hamilton has more to lose this year in terms of legacy as Bottas looks quick and we all know Vettel has Kimi covered.

Vettel and Hamilton are two drivers that are very close, both have their strengths and weaknesses. Hamilton is probably (IMO, I will be flamed anyway but who cares) the more naturally talented.

Hamilton has quicker onelap-pace, is unstoppable when the car is working, not as sensitive to having it diled in 100% as many other drivers on the grid, Vettel included.

Vettel has a reputation of not crumbling as easy under pressure. I'm not sure what to think of that as he is very whiny on the radio (as is Hamilton) when things are not going his way, and he has this sense of entitlement that is very offputting. That said I think he has improved and is more likable now. When Vettel is happy it's contagous.

If Ferrari can keep up the development over the season I think he is the one who will take it.
Here is why. Ferrari is more likely to back one driver than Mercedes are, and Bottas is more likely to challenge his teammate than Kimi is likely to challenge his. All respect to Kimi, but how is he still at Ferrari? If Hamilton and Bottas take points of each other Vettel can cruise to the WDC if the cars remain as close in performance.

Hamilton needs a reliable car, he need to qualify ahead of Vettel and Bottas consistently and make good starts.
Also Mercedes need to improve their strategies as Ferrari is beating them in that department.

As for the legacy part, I'm not sure. It all depends on how the WDC is won. Is it because of reliablility it will have little effect on the legacy, is it because one driver simply was superior then it might have a huge impact on the legacy. Also, I'm not sure how much one season of going head to head will effect things.


Anyway, just my quick 2 cents.

Legacy?

You put a driver in the fastest car, he's likely to become the World Champion.

Hamilton has to beat Bottas, who hasn't featured much on the list of 'greats'.

Vettel had to beat Ricciardo - and didn't.

Alonso doesn't exist.

I'd be more inclined to call it Legacy if they were all racing competitive cars.

Hopefully F1 will move more toward a situation where many more of the drivers will have chances like Bottas has this year.

Perhaps more correct to evaluate how many title contender cars that have turned out as a title.

IMO Lewis has had the most, and has it this year to, so a rate of 2007, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 to 3 or 4 titles in 8 title contenders.

Sebastian 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2017 to 4 or 5 titles in 6 title contenders.

You can bring lot's of circumstances in to it but IMO Alonso, Ricciardo a Verstappen with the experience would have achieved in these numers to.

It's an interesting comparison, this is the closest Vettel and Hamilton have come to having cars of comparable performance and reliability thus far this season, if it continues like this then you could say one driver has beaten the other fair and square, so far Vettel seems to have the upper hand beating Hamilton 3-1.

For this two what will determine it will be robot like consistency,

Hamilton as good as he his, his biggest problem is consistency dropping from high peaks to the lowest of lows.
Case in point end of '15 he said because he had won the title he let Rosberg dominate him till the accident in catalunya which led to Rosberg winning the title last year.

Vettel his strength lies in his consistency once the car is the way he wants it, he shines bright, and most folks know this already the consistency of the man is phenomenal.

Should Vettel win this year, it will be cementing his legacy esp in a Ferrari!

AnRs wrote:Perhaps more correct to evaluate how many title contender cars that have turned out as a title.

IMO Lewis has had the most, and has it this year to, so a rate of 2007, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 to 3 or 4 titles in 8 title contenders.

Sebastian 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2017 to 4 or 5 titles in 6 title contenders.

You can bring lot's of circumstances in to it but IMO Alonso, Ricciardo a Verstappen with the experience would have achieved in these numers to.

2012 was hardly a title contending year for Hamilton and in 2010 he clearly didn't have the fastest car, but it's true to say that Vettel is the more likely to get the job done.

AnRs wrote:Perhaps more correct to evaluate how many title contender cars that have turned out as a title.

IMO Lewis has had the most, and has it this year to, so a rate of 2007, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 to 3 or 4 titles in 8 title contenders.

Sebastian 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2017 to 4 or 5 titles in 6 title contenders.

You can bring lot's of circumstances in to it but IMO Alonso, Ricciardo a Verstappen with the experience would have achieved in these numers to.

How exactly, Alonso I might understand but Ricciardo and Max really?

Rockie wrote:For this two what will determine it will be robot like consistency,

Hamilton as good as he his, his biggest problem is consistency dropping from high peaks to the lowest of lows.
Case in point end of '15 he said because he had won the title he let Rosberg dominate him till the accident in catalunya which led to Rosberg winning the title last year.

Vettel his strength lies in his consistency once the car is the way he wants it, he shines bright, and most folks know this already the consistency of the man is phenomenal.

Should Vettel win this year, it will be cementing his legacy esp in a Ferrari!

Whilst I know you like to bring Hamilton down in as many ways as possible, you have so many more things you can use that are actually true rather than weak arguments like that. Rosberg had Hamilton easily beat for the last 3 races of 2015 but that stopped as soon as 2016 begun.

Nico out qualified Hamilton in the last 7 races of 2015 and won the last 3, he could have won 6 of the last 7 races of that season too. He was unlucky and or made small errors to prevent that. That is his golden period.
2016 Hamilton beat him 2-0 in qualifying in those first 4 races (his car didn't make it in the other 2 as it broke down and he started way down the order). Bottas crashed into him at another, leaving Australia were Hamilton messed up the start.

If you want to highlight a period where Nico was better than Lewis, use the last 7-8 races of 2015 but don't include 2016 as it shows you are just reading off a result sheet and it was clear to most knowledgeable viewers that Hamilton was back on top come 2016 and if you are saying he lost the title in the first 4 races of 2016 you are essentially saying he lost it because of reliability - I am sure a point you don't want to push.

Which driver can consistently bring his "A" game to every race weekend?

And even then, the car determines the final tally at season's end. And with the pace of development by the big teams, no one can predict which car will be more dominant each month. And when we assess any driver/car combination, it should be on a yearly basis, not race to race. For example, Spain is a track that brutalizes tires, and IMO the Ferraris will walk away from the Mercedes at that race. It is not a reflection on the drivers, just a harsh reality of life on an issue they have little control over. So even if Hamilton's or Bottas' car lets them down, that is no reflection on their abilities or proves that Vettel is better in any way.

I prefer to avoid the tabloid mentality of rushing to judgement.

When I watch the EPL on Saturdays I am always smitten by the Brit TV announcer's preoccupation with "legacy" and "place in history" for each match. I guess it's a cultural thing because where I come from we do respect and remember history, this "legacy" is reserved for Hall of Fame ceremonies.

lamo wrote:

Rockie wrote:For this two what will determine it will be robot like consistency,

Hamilton as good as he his, his biggest problem is consistency dropping from high peaks to the lowest of lows.
Case in point end of '15 he said because he had won the title he let Rosberg dominate him till the accident in catalunya which led to Rosberg winning the title last year.

Vettel his strength lies in his consistency once the car is the way he wants it, he shines bright, and most folks know this already the consistency of the man is phenomenal.

Should Vettel win this year, it will be cementing his legacy esp in a Ferrari!

Whilst I know you like to bring Hamilton down in as many ways as possible, you have so many more things you can use that are actually true rather than weak arguments like that. Rosberg had Hamilton easily beat for the last 3 races of 2015 but that stopped as soon as 2016 begun.

Nico out qualified Hamilton in the last 7 races of 2015 and won the last 3, he could have won 6 of the last 7 races of that season too. He was unlucky and or made small errors to prevent that. That is his golden period.
2016 Hamilton beat him 2-0 in qualifying in those first 4 races (his car didn't make it in the other 2 as it broke down and he started way down the order). Bottas crashed into him at another, leaving Australia were Hamilton messed up the start.

If you want to highlight a period where Nico was better than Lewis, use the last 7-8 races of 2015 but don't include 2016 as it shows you are just reading off a result sheet and it was clear to most knowledgeable viewers that Hamilton was back on top come 2016 and if you are saying he lost the title in the first 4 races of 2016 you are essentially saying he lost it because of reliability - I am sure a point you don't want to push.

You make me laugh really!

Exactly my point a guy just winning the title and then going of the boil, out qualifying and then finishing behind still same!

Lets assume all things being equal going forward this season and no mechanical issues affect any of them you will look back to Russia and say days like that is what brings him down not me!

Hamilton had lost his form before he won the title, Rosberg out qualified him in the last 6 races. He won 3 of them, retired from the lead in another, he lost himself the win in the USA to a gust of wind and Hamilton pushed him out of the lead in Japan. Rosberg had started to get ahead of Hamilton 3 races before the title was won. Hamilton pulled some desperate passes at turn twice and they collided with Hamilton coming off better twice.

Maybe we view things differently, when comparing Hamilton and Rosberg which to you view as more telling.

1) Rosberg pole and comfortable lead before retiring with mechanical issue. Russia 2016
2) Rosberg pole as Hamilton blows up in qualifying and starts P20. Rosberg wins. China 2016

For me the first is much more indicative, the second is just winning a race with no opposition. The other is beating the current WDC fair and square. Russia 2016 was a bad weekend for Hamilton even though he won the race.

Andy2402 wrote:Now then, there's plenty of discussion around the title this year as it seems we have a 2 team fight for the title, the first in a while.
For me Hamilton or vettel will win the WDC , no disrespect intended to kimi and Bottas, I just don't think they'll have the pace at enough weekends to come out on top vs their team mates (I know strange things do happen though - rosberg title )

I'd be careful on Bottas, he owned the last race and has twice out qualified Lewis. People are writing him off far too easy and did so after the first race.

Andy2402 wrote: For me this season is going to be a legacy defining season for both Hamilton and vettel.

Completely disagree. This season is going to be defined by which ever car is best on race day (which I still think it's Ferrari because of their race pace).

Andy2402 wrote: Does anyone else think that Hamilton is going to utterly welt under Vettel's consistency? My opinion has always been Hamilton is slightly quicker (.070 seconds - 0.1) than vettel. Relative to that I felt Hamilton was (0.1 to 0.2) quicker than Rosberg. Hamilton has in the last couple of years had "runs" , but that was in the rocket ship. He's now in a rocket ship vs a rocket ship with vettel in there. I appreciate vettel also had his "runs" in a rocket ship but it wasn't as fast a rocket ship !

Completely disagree again. Vettel is not as consistent as some claim when it comes to maxing out the car (no driver is in my view), Every driver has off weekends. The only difference is Vettel consistently beats his team mate (to be fair, he's dominating him almost far too clearly and has done since joining Ferrari).

The only real way we can truly compare these two is get them in the same car.

The good thing is for Lewis he has had not just a range of team mates but two world champions one which is considered to be the best on that grid (Alonso) while being a rookie in F1. When it comes to Lewis being defined - 2007 is always going to shadow most things in his career. Bit like Button - his career won't completely be defined by 2009 or the first race of 2012 (3 races that season) instead he gets defined by 2011 Canada being at the back of the grid, pitting endlessly and penalties yet some how made nearly every other driver on that grid looking average. As a Button fan I expected him to finish well outside of the points from the first accident. I'm not joking that this was my favourite race for Button in his career (even have it recorded and kept including the race stopped thanks to the race).

When it comes to Seb he has been beaten and quite clearly (3 wins to nothing) by Ric. Good thing for Ric, is it wasn't done through consistently either or luck/reliability. He deserved those better performances over Seb which I still believe is the reason why Seb left RBR.

I don't think consistently is going to be the key this season it will be who nails it and has the best car on race day. Look at last season of course I question reliability but what truly nailed it for Nico - was those first four races where he was untouchable.

Teddy007 wrote:This season is going to be defined by which ever car is best on race day.

Couldn't disagree more strongly with this. It basically takes away any driver achievement and lays it all at the feet of the car.

Every race so far this season could have been won by a driver from either team. The winners didn't just have to sit there and let the car do the work. The fact that we've not yet had a formation 1-2 finish so far this season underlines that.

Teddy007 wrote:

Andy2402 wrote:Now then, there's plenty of discussion around the title this year as it seems we have a 2 team fight for the title, the first in a while.
For me Hamilton or vettel will win the WDC , no disrespect intended to kimi and Bottas, I just don't think they'll have the pace at enough weekends to come out on top vs their team mates (I know strange things do happen though - rosberg title )

I'd be careful on Bottas, he owned the last race and has twice out qualified Lewis. People are writing him off far too easy and did so after the first race.

Andy2402 wrote: For me this season is going to be a legacy defining season for both Hamilton and vettel.

Completely disagree. This season is going to be defined by which ever car is best on race day (which I still think it's Ferrari because of their race pace).

Andy2402 wrote: Does anyone else think that Hamilton is going to utterly welt under Vettel's consistency? My opinion has always been Hamilton is slightly quicker (.070 seconds - 0.1) than vettel. Relative to that I felt Hamilton was (0.1 to 0.2) quicker than Rosberg. Hamilton has in the last couple of years had "runs" , but that was in the rocket ship. He's now in a rocket ship vs a rocket ship with vettel in there. I appreciate vettel also had his "runs" in a rocket ship but it wasn't as fast a rocket ship !

Completely disagree again. Vettel is not as consistent as some claim when it comes to maxing out the car (no driver is in my view), Every driver has off weekends. The only difference is Vettel consistently beats his team mate (to be fair, he's dominating him almost far too clearly and has done since joining Ferrari).

The only real way we can truly compare these two is get them in the same car.

The good thing is for Lewis he has had not just a range of team mates but two world champions one which is considered to be the best on that grid (Alonso) while being a rookie in F1. When it comes to Lewis being defined - 2007 is always going to shadow most things in his career. Bit like Button - his career won't completely be defined by 2009 or the first race of 2012 (3 races that season) instead he gets defined by 2011 Canada being at the back of the grid, pitting endlessly and penalties yet some how made nearly every other driver on that grid looking average. As a Button fan I expected him to finish well outside of the points from the first accident. I'm not joking that this was my favourite race for Button in his career (even have it recorded and kept including the race stopped thanks to the race).

When it comes to Seb he has been beaten and quite clearly (3 wins to nothing) by Ric. Good thing for Ric, is it wasn't done through consistently either or luck/reliability. He deserved those better performances over Seb which I still believe is the reason why Seb left RBR.

I don't think consistently is going to be the key this season it will be who nails it and has the best car on race day. Look at last season of course I question reliability but what truly nailed it for Nico - was those first four races where he was untouchable.

I don't understand how you have come to the conclusion you have, every driver can have an off day or weekend, but in a dominant car, I can't remember Vettel having a day like Lewis had in sochi, but you can point me to one if I'm wrong!

You don't need to have them in the same car.

The good thing for Vettel is the car was not going to win a title, but with Hamilton the fact he lost the title in a dominant car which all he had to do was beat Rosberg.

Also this need to always refer to 2014 as if that defines him more than any other time in his career, yeah he left redbull to Ferrari as he got beat it has nothing to do with being offered $50m or emulating his hero!
It's this kind of mentality that has been detrimental to Alonso's career rather than think about winning, being more concerned about beating his team mate, not to jump the gun but Ferrari look like a title winning car now, staying at redbull to beat Ricciardo means nothing compared to winning the WDC with Ferrari which he might do this year!

Is the 2017 Mercedes a dominant car then? Its won less races than the 2014 Red Bull so far. I've also never understood this dominant car thing, a car is a car so long as it handles well. Dominance is a relative term. Neither Hamilton (bar a few races in 2009) or Vettel (bar 2007 and some races in 2008) ever had a bad one.

If Mercedes withdrew at the end of 2013 Red Bull would be the best car, although physically it would be the same car. Would Vettel's performance be any better?

lamo wrote:Is the 2017 Mercedes a dominant car then? Its won less races than the 2014 Red Bull so far. I've also never understood this dominant car thing, a car is a car so long as it handles well. Dominance is a relative term. Neither Hamilton (bar a few races in 2009) or Vettel (bar 2007 and some races in 2008) ever had a bad one.

If Mercedes withdrew at the end of 2013 Red Bull would be the best car, although physically it would be the same car. Would Vettel's performance be any better?

Only if you have a particularly skewed way of looking at stats. By this stage of the 2014 season Red Bull hadn't won anything. Mercedes has won 50% of the races they've been in so far this season. You're not comparing like for like.

What don't you understand about this dominant car thing? Isn't it fairly self-explanatory?

If this Merc is dominant then certainly the Red Bull of 2010 was. I recall Vettel having some bad days.

lamo wrote:Is the 2017 Mercedes a dominant car then? Its won less races than the 2014 Red Bull so far. I've also never understood this dominant car thing, a car is a car so long as it handles well. Dominance is a relative term. Neither Hamilton (bar a few races in 2009) or Vettel (bar 2007 and some races in 2008) ever had a bad one.

If Mercedes withdrew at the end of 2013 Red Bull would be the best car, although physically it would be the same car. Would Vettel's performance be any better?

The motivations certainly would be - although I've always had a sneaky feeling that Vettel's (lack of) performance in 2014 were down largely to a bunch of different factors:

1. Fatherhood for the first time - I understand it impacts people differently, but the emotional state of a person directly affects their motivation
2. Clearly not a title-contender for the first time in 5 years
3. Change in driving style with the ban on EBDs which he had mastered
4. Lastly, the lure of a Ferrari contract - I have a sneaky suspicion that there were some performance clauses built into his contract, and he wasn't exactly giving it a 100% to perhaps trigger them. Just a theory, but wouldn't surprise me if it were right.

mikeyg123 wrote:If this Merc is dominant then certainly the Red Bull of 2010 was. I recall Vettel having some bad days.

Nobody said the Merc of 2017 is dominant (yet) - though the preceding 3 years it most certainly was.

A.J. wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:If this Merc is dominant then certainly the Red Bull of 2010 was. I recall Vettel having some bad days.

Nobody said the Merc of 2017 is dominant (yet) - though the preceding 3 years it most certainly was.

"in a dominant car, I can't remember Vettel having a day like Lewis had in sochi"

Unless the poster means the 2017 Merc is dominant then the sentence is nonsensical.

Zoue wrote:

lamo wrote:Is the 2017 Mercedes a dominant car then? Its won less races than the 2014 Red Bull so far. I've also never understood this dominant car thing, a car is a car so long as it handles well. Dominance is a relative term. Neither Hamilton (bar a few races in 2009) or Vettel (bar 2007 and some races in 2008) ever had a bad one.

If Mercedes withdrew at the end of 2013 Red Bull would be the best car, although physically it would be the same car. Would Vettel's performance be any better?

Only if you have a particularly skewed way of looking at stats. By this stage of the 2014 season Red Bull hadn't won anything. Mercedes has won 50% of the races they've been in so far this season. You're not comparing like for like.

What don't you understand about this dominant car thing? Isn't it fairly self-explanatory?

I don't understand of why it is of any importance. Take the 2014 Mercedes. Great car, perfect etc etc. Now if Audi were on the grid and had a car 1 second quicker that season what difference does that make to the Mercedes battle between Rosberg and Hamilton - none. I don't understand why some people choose to only look at seasons in which the car was dominant? What does that tell you?

Seasons in which the car is dominant tell you the least, because if you have a really poor race you generally still finish P2 behind your team mate. Look what happens when you have a bad race in a none dominant car - Hamilton P4 in Russia.

A.J. wrote:

lamo wrote:Is the 2017 Mercedes a dominant car then? Its won less races than the 2014 Red Bull so far. I've also never understood this dominant car thing, a car is a car so long as it handles well. Dominance is a relative term. Neither Hamilton (bar a few races in 2009) or Vettel (bar 2007 and some races in 2008) ever had a bad one.

If Mercedes withdrew at the end of 2013 Red Bull would be the best car, although physically it would be the same car. Would Vettel's performance be any better?

The motivations certainly would be - although I've always had a sneaky feeling that Vettel's (lack of) performance in 2014 were down largely to a bunch of different factors:

1. Fatherhood for the first time - I understand it impacts people differently, but the emotional state of a person directly affects their motivation
2. Clearly not a title-contender for the first time in 5 years
3. Change in driving style with the ban on EBDs which he had mastered
4. Lastly, the lure of a Ferrari contract - I have a sneaky suspicion that there were some performance clauses built into his contract, and he wasn't exactly giving it a 100% to perhaps trigger them. Just a theory, but wouldn't surprise me if it were right.

I am sure all of those played some part, but also a new team mate. You think Webber beats him in 2014? I would wager a lot of money he wouldn't.

lamo wrote:

A.J. wrote:

lamo wrote:Is the 2017 Mercedes a dominant car then? Its won less races than the 2014 Red Bull so far. I've also never understood this dominant car thing, a car is a car so long as it handles well. Dominance is a relative term. Neither Hamilton (bar a few races in 2009) or Vettel (bar 2007 and some races in 2008) ever had a bad one.

If Mercedes withdrew at the end of 2013 Red Bull would be the best car, although physically it would be the same car. Would Vettel's performance be any better?

The motivations certainly would be - although I've always had a sneaky feeling that Vettel's (lack of) performance in 2014 were down largely to a bunch of different factors:

1. Fatherhood for the first time - I understand it impacts people differently, but the emotional state of a person directly affects their motivation
2. Clearly not a title-contender for the first time in 5 years
3. Change in driving style with the ban on EBDs which he had mastered
4. Lastly, the lure of a Ferrari contract - I have a sneaky suspicion that there were some performance clauses built into his contract, and he wasn't exactly giving it a 100% to perhaps trigger them. Just a theory, but wouldn't surprise me if it were right.

I am sure all of those played some part, but also a new team mate. You think Webber beats him in 2014? I would wager a lot of money he wouldn't.

I thought Vettel only got the Ferrari drive "last-minute" because Alonso threw his final hissy fit during the season? If that's true, I can hardly agree with point 4 being valid for the whole year. I do think Vettel was unsettled that season and not motivated to the same extent he had been the previous 5 seasons, and the driving style ban definitely hurt him.

In any case, I agree that had Webber still been there, Vettel would have rolled him over.

lamo wrote:

Zoue wrote:

lamo wrote:Is the 2017 Mercedes a dominant car then? Its won less races than the 2014 Red Bull so far. I've also never understood this dominant car thing, a car is a car so long as it handles well. Dominance is a relative term. Neither Hamilton (bar a few races in 2009) or Vettel (bar 2007 and some races in 2008) ever had a bad one.

If Mercedes withdrew at the end of 2013 Red Bull would be the best car, although physically it would be the same car. Would Vettel's performance be any better?

Only if you have a particularly skewed way of looking at stats. By this stage of the 2014 season Red Bull hadn't won anything. Mercedes has won 50% of the races they've been in so far this season. You're not comparing like for like.

What don't you understand about this dominant car thing? Isn't it fairly self-explanatory?

I don't understand of why it is of any importance. Take the 2014 Mercedes. Great car, perfect etc etc. Now if Audi were on the grid and had a car 1 second quicker that season what difference does that make to the Mercedes battle between Rosberg and Hamilton - none. I don't understand why some people choose to only look at seasons in which the car was dominant? What does that tell you?

Seasons in which the car is dominant tell you the least, because if you have a really poor race you generally still finish P2 behind your team mate. Look what happens when you have a bad race in a none dominant car - Hamilton P4 in Russia.

Of course it makes a difference. The Mercedes could dictate the pace for the most part and were able to drive well within themselves as they had no competition. There are different pressures at play, too, not withstanding the changes to public perception. If they were chasing, instead of leading, each race may have panned out differently for them (aside from the obvious points loss).

Agree that a dominant car may mask a driver's poor performance. Indeed, I wrote in some detail about Rosberg's qualifying in 2015, comparing him to Kimi. Where Kimi was slated for his poor qualifying performances relative to Vettel, Rosberg was feted for his, despite the fact that he often qualified slower to Lewis than Kimi did to Seb. Yet even dropping half a second to Lewis, Rosberg still qualified 2nd, while Kimi ended up in the bottom half of the top ten and heavily compromised his race. Which in itself shows that a dominant car can make a huge difference

Its still not something that makes a difference to me, obviously in qualifying it makes no difference. Vettel is amazing in the wet and the few wet qualifying sessions that year he excelled in, but Ricciardo easily beat him in the dry 13-4 was it? He also kept up a pretty similar level on race day, which I don't see would have been any different if the Red Bull was half a second faster than Mercedes rather than over half a second slower than it. The fastest and better race driver rises to the top, the only thing that stops that is reliability.

Same rules for all of them, if you get beat you get beat. The only excuse is reliability favouring a team mate.

theferret wrote:

lamo wrote:

A.J. wrote:

lamo wrote:Is the 2017 Mercedes a dominant car then? Its won less races than the 2014 Red Bull so far. I've also never understood this dominant car thing, a car is a car so long as it handles well. Dominance is a relative term. Neither Hamilton (bar a few races in 2009) or Vettel (bar 2007 and some races in 2008) ever had a bad one.

If Mercedes withdrew at the end of 2013 Red Bull would be the best car, although physically it would be the same car. Would Vettel's performance be any better?

The motivations certainly would be - although I've always had a sneaky feeling that Vettel's (lack of) performance in 2014 were down largely to a bunch of different factors:

1. Fatherhood for the first time - I understand it impacts people differently, but the emotional state of a person directly affects their motivation
2. Clearly not a title-contender for the first time in 5 years
3. Change in driving style with the ban on EBDs which he had mastered
4. Lastly, the lure of a Ferrari contract - I have a sneaky suspicion that there were some performance clauses built into his contract, and he wasn't exactly giving it a 100% to perhaps trigger them. Just a theory, but wouldn't surprise me if it were right.

I am sure all of those played some part, but also a new team mate. You think Webber beats him in 2014? I would wager a lot of money he wouldn't.

I thought Vettel only got the Ferrari drive "last-minute" because Alonso threw his final hissy fit during the season? If that's true, I can hardly agree with point 4 being valid for the whole year. I do think Vettel was unsettled that season and not motivated to the same extent he had been the previous 5 seasons, and the driving style ban definitely hurt him.

In any case, I agree that had Webber still been there, Vettel would have rolled him over.

Indeed it's sad the list of excuses that have to be made even to the point that Vettel deliberately performed poorly.

lamo wrote:Its still not something that makes a difference to me, obviously in qualifying it makes no difference. Vettel is amazing in the wet and the few wet qualifying sessions that year he excelled in, but Ricciardo easily beat him in the dry 13-4 was it? He also kept up a pretty similar level on race day, which I don't see would have been any different if the Red Bull was half a second faster than Mercedes rather than over half a second slower than it. The fastest and better race driver rises to the top, the only thing that stops that is reliability.

Same rules for all of them, if you get beat you get beat. The only excuse is reliability favouring a team mate.

Yes indeed which tends to be all defining when driver A beats driver B but if it's the other way around then all sorts of caveats can be thrown in.

mikeyg123 wrote:If this Merc is dominant then certainly the Red Bull of 2010 was. I recall Vettel having some bad days.

I could be wrong, but pretty sure he had a poor Germany 2011. Outpaced by his teammate in all the practice sessions and outqualified - capped off with an error strewn race.

pokerman wrote:

theferret wrote:

lamo wrote:

A.J. wrote:

lamo wrote:Is the 2017 Mercedes a dominant car then? Its won less races than the 2014 Red Bull so far. I've also never understood this dominant car thing, a car is a car so long as it handles well. Dominance is a relative term. Neither Hamilton (bar a few races in 2009) or Vettel (bar 2007 and some races in 2008) ever had a bad one.

If Mercedes withdrew at the end of 2013 Red Bull would be the best car, although physically it would be the same car. Would Vettel's performance be any better?

The motivations certainly would be - although I've always had a sneaky feeling that Vettel's (lack of) performance in 2014 were down largely to a bunch of different factors:

1. Fatherhood for the first time - I understand it impacts people differently, but the emotional state of a person directly affects their motivation
2. Clearly not a title-contender for the first time in 5 years
3. Change in driving style with the ban on EBDs which he had mastered
4. Lastly, the lure of a Ferrari contract - I have a sneaky suspicion that there were some performance clauses built into his contract, and he wasn't exactly giving it a 100% to perhaps trigger them. Just a theory, but wouldn't surprise me if it were right.

I am sure all of those played some part, but also a new team mate. You think Webber beats him in 2014? I would wager a lot of money he wouldn't.

I thought Vettel only got the Ferrari drive "last-minute" because Alonso threw his final hissy fit during the season? If that's true, I can hardly agree with point 4 being valid for the whole year. I do think Vettel was unsettled that season and not motivated to the same extent he had been the previous 5 seasons, and the driving style ban definitely hurt him.

In any case, I agree that had Webber still been there, Vettel would have rolled him over.

Indeed it's sad the list of excuses that have to be made even to the point that Vettel deliberately performed poorly.

How about just giving Ric some credit here...

lamo wrote:Its still not something that makes a difference to me, obviously in qualifying it makes no difference. Vettel is amazing in the wet and the few wet qualifying sessions that year he excelled in, but Ricciardo easily beat him in the dry 13-4 was it? He also kept up a pretty similar level on race day, which I don't see would have been any different if the Red Bull was half a second faster than Mercedes rather than over half a second slower than it. The fastest and better race driver rises to the top, the only thing that stops that is reliability.

Same rules for all of them, if you get beat you get beat. The only excuse is reliability favouring a team mate.

It's fairly straightforward, really. In a dominant car if you have a bad day you'll likely still end up 2nd and won't look quite as bad, whereas in a car fighting with the rest of the pack you may end up way down the order and the visible gap to your team mate may look much bigger. That's the difference between being beaten and getting a drubbing. I don't see how this is a mystery?

edit: and i the post you were responding to I demonstrated exactly how it could and did make a huge difference in qualifying, and you come back with "obviously in qualifying it makes no difference?" Did you even read my post to make a comment like that?

SR1 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

theferret wrote:

lamo wrote:

A.J. wrote: The motivations certainly would be - although I've always had a sneaky feeling that Vettel's (lack of) performance in 2014 were down largely to a bunch of different factors:

1. Fatherhood for the first time - I understand it impacts people differently, but the emotional state of a person directly affects their motivation
2. Clearly not a title-contender for the first time in 5 years
3. Change in driving style with the ban on EBDs which he had mastered
4. Lastly, the lure of a Ferrari contract - I have a sneaky suspicion that there were some performance clauses built into his contract, and he wasn't exactly giving it a 100% to perhaps trigger them. Just a theory, but wouldn't surprise me if it were right.

I am sure all of those played some part, but also a new team mate. You think Webber beats him in 2014? I would wager a lot of money he wouldn't.

I thought Vettel only got the Ferrari drive "last-minute" because Alonso threw his final hissy fit during the season? If that's true, I can hardly agree with point 4 being valid for the whole year. I do think Vettel was unsettled that season and not motivated to the same extent he had been the previous 5 seasons, and the driving style ban definitely hurt him.

In any case, I agree that had Webber still been there, Vettel would have rolled him over.

Indeed it's sad the list of excuses that have to be made even to the point that Vettel deliberately performed poorly.

How about just giving Ric some credit here...

To clarify, none of this is meant to take credit away from Ricciardo - he was stellar in 2014, beat his 4x WDC team-mate, and fully deserved all the success he got. It is a bit mystifying when people rate Verstappen higher than Ric (though he certainly is in the wet) - he seems to easily have the measure of Verstappen purely on qualy pace, and would have been the deserved winner of both Spain and Monaco last year were it not for RBR screwing up his strategy/pitstop.

SR1 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:If this Merc is dominant then certainly the Red Bull of 2010 was. I recall Vettel having some bad days.

I could be wrong, but pretty sure he had a poor Germany 2011. Outpaced by his teammate in all the practice sessions and outqualified - capped off with an error strewn race.

Weird because that was the one track that Alonso completely went missing in 2006 too. Fisichella seemed quicker all weekend and out qualified him by 0.4

Zoue wrote:

lamo wrote:Its still not something that makes a difference to me, obviously in qualifying it makes no difference. Vettel is amazing in the wet and the few wet qualifying sessions that year he excelled in, but Ricciardo easily beat him in the dry 13-4 was it? He also kept up a pretty similar level on race day, which I don't see would have been any different if the Red Bull was half a second faster than Mercedes rather than over half a second slower than it. The fastest and better race driver rises to the top, the only thing that stops that is reliability.

Same rules for all of them, if you get beat you get beat. The only excuse is reliability favouring a team mate.

It's fairly straightforward, really. In a dominant car if you have a bad day you'll likely still end up 2nd and won't look quite as bad, whereas in a car fighting with the rest of the pack you may end up way down the order and the visible gap to your team mate may look much bigger. That's the difference between being beaten and getting a drubbing. I don't see how this is a mystery?

edit: and i the post you were responding to I demonstrated exactly how it could and did make a huge difference in qualifying, and you come back with "obviously in qualifying it makes no difference?" Did you even read my post to make a comment like that?

I don't agree, maybe because I analyse it quite deeply already I already allow for this. I agree if you casually look at results tables and don't analyse anything in high detail (like looking at stints, pace in free air etc etc) then that could be the case. When I say Vettel was easily beat by Ricciardo I am looking at it in high detail, qualifying head to head. Race pace in clean air, allowing for misfortune and not just looking at the points table or position finished in each race, there was rarely more than 1-2 positions between them anyway.

For example. Webber qualifying 0.1 behind Vettel and basically only being 0.1-0.2 off in race pace but finishing 4th whilst Vettel won because it was a tight field is more impressive to me than Webber qualifying 0.4 behind Vettel and Vettel driving off into the distance whilst Webber was clearly also slower in race pace but still finished 2nd.

Ricciardo is actually quite average in the Wet. Vergne beat him every time in the wet and its the reason he out scored him as team mates as Vergne scored big in some wet races. Vettel beat him 3-0 in the three wet qualifying session in 2014 (Australia, Ricciardo was ahead but Vettel lost his ERS) and the one wet race. In the dry Ricciardo kind of hammered Vettel in qualifying, those wet quali's saved his record a bit. Now Max is clearly stronger in the wet too.

Ricciardo has come up against possibly the two best wet weathers drivers but he has been behind all his team mates in those conditions.