planetf1.com

Ennis wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Black_Flag_11 wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:https://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2017/05/ ... open-goal/

Interesting that Vettel radioed the team to say he should pit during the VSC.

I'm not convinced it would have won them the race. If Vettel would have pit under VSC and Hamilton hadn't then yes he would have won, if they both came in under VSC there would have been around an 8-10 second gap between them but Hamilton would have far better tyres. The gap would have closed I'm certain, passing would have been more difficult than it was though and it would have probably have given us a better battle/race, maybe Ferrari should listen to Vettel more often!

It is worrying though that will all the information available to them on the pit wall Vettel has actually out done them in strategy/quick thinking twice in one weekend.

Yes, it's not the first time the Ferrari strategist has made questionable calls

We also need to consider though, the strategists are playing the percentages. When his engine looked like going pop (or whatever their concern was in Qualifying), the strategist is thinking of risk versus reward. If there is a 10% risk we should keep him out, if its 90% we should bring him in (with a whole bunch of grey area in between). You can make the wrong call and get lucky, or you can make the right call and be unlucky. From the outside we can't tell.

Vettel may well have got lucky twice. And on the 2nd, even that was dependent on Merc. My memory is failing, was Bottas still alive at the VSC? Either way Merc had options, and they probably feared giving Hamilton clean air.. Bottas as a blocker would seal it though.

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote: I would certainly take what some say with a pinch of salt. I think you, for example, would struggle to admit that Hamilton ever has an advantage of any kind

Yeah he did miracles in 2014-16 in that donkey of a car.

See? Case in point!

I think even you would struggle to claim Lewis didn't have an advantage over any non-Merc cars in the last three years, but when things are closer it's not so straightforward.

No this year it's not straight forward for me at all but for you apparently it is as you can precisely ascertain the relative performance of the cars it seems and surprise surprise the Ferrari always seems to be the slower car.

I said the Ferrari seemed slower down the straight, which was supported by the video feed, especially when comparing the two overtakes. This seems to bother you unduly.

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote: Yeah he did miracles in 2014-16 in that donkey of a car.

See? Case in point!

I think even you would struggle to claim Lewis didn't have an advantage over any non-Merc cars in the last three years, but when things are closer it's not so straightforward.

No this year it's not straight forward for me at all but for you apparently it is as you can precisely ascertain the relative performance of the cars it seems and surprise surprise the Ferrari always seems to be the slower car.

I said the Ferrari seemed slower down the straight, which was supported by the video feed, especially when comparing the two overtakes. This seems to bother you unduly.

Because I couldn't equate that with the Ferrari being quicker down the straight in qualifying, maybe you see that as quite a simplistic view given your detailed reasoning of how cars can be different in the race than qualifying even though the teams can change nothing on the cars between qualifying and the race.

So I just can't get my head around what you are saying and feel more comfortable with the reasoning that Hamilton simply was able to carry more exit speed relative to the car in front when comparing the two overtakes.

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote: See? Case in point!

I think even you would struggle to claim Lewis didn't have an advantage over any non-Merc cars in the last three years, but when things are closer it's not so straightforward.

No this year it's not straight forward for me at all but for you apparently it is as you can precisely ascertain the relative performance of the cars it seems and surprise surprise the Ferrari always seems to be the slower car.

I said the Ferrari seemed slower down the straight, which was supported by the video feed, especially when comparing the two overtakes. This seems to bother you unduly.

Because I couldn't equate that with the Ferrari being quicker down the straight in qualifying, maybe you see that as quite a simplistic view given your detailed reasoning of how cars can be different in the race than qualifying even though the teams can change nothing on the cars between qualifying and the race.

So I just can't get my head around what you are saying and feel more comfortable with the reasoning that Hamilton simply was able to carry more exit speed relative to the car in front when comparing the two overtakes.

Either you just can't resist the urge to be sarcastic and just do it anyway regardless of content, or you genuinely have a complete lack of understanding that the drivers have control over engine modes and where to use the ERS, as I've just explained to you. So which is it?

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote: No this year it's not straight forward for me at all but for you apparently it is as you can precisely ascertain the relative performance of the cars it seems and surprise surprise the Ferrari always seems to be the slower car.

I said the Ferrari seemed slower down the straight, which was supported by the video feed, especially when comparing the two overtakes. This seems to bother you unduly.

Because I couldn't equate that with the Ferrari being quicker down the straight in qualifying, maybe you see that as quite a simplistic view given your detailed reasoning of how cars can be different in the race than qualifying even though the teams can change nothing on the cars between qualifying and the race.

So I just can't get my head around what you are saying and feel more comfortable with the reasoning that Hamilton simply was able to carry more exit speed relative to the car in front when comparing the two overtakes.

Either you just can't resist the urge to be sarcastic and just do it anyway regardless of content, or you genuinely have a complete lack of understanding that the drivers have control over engine modes and where to use the ERS, as I've just explained to you. So which is it?

You think I was being sarcastic, that's me done with this discussion.

1 19 F. MASSA 339.6 15:36:45
2 8 R. GROSJEAN 338.9 14:58:14
3 44 L. HAMILTON 338.4 14:59:47
4 18 L. STROLL 335.0 14:07:57
5 5 S. VETTEL 334.9 14:36:40

F1_Ernie wrote:Do you know which part of the race those fastest laps was set? What about fuel loads and tyres? You need to know all this information before any comparisons can be made.

I thought the Ferrari looked the faster race car it just happened to be that 3 key events happened in the race which helped Mercedes.

Also surely the best way to compare speed trap speeds is in quali when all cars have the same tyres, fuel loads and DRS. In the race all these variables can be different and with slipstream.

F1_Ernie wrote:Do you know which part of the race those fastest laps was set? What about fuel loads and tyres? You need to know all this information before any comparisons can be made.

I thought the Ferrari looked the faster race car it just happened to be that 3 key events happened in the race which helped Mercedes.

Also surely the best way to compare speed trap speeds is in quali when all cars have the same tyres, fuel loads and DRS. In the race all these variables can be different and with slipstream.

lamo wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:Do you know which part of the race those fastest laps was set? What about fuel loads and tyres? You need to know all this information before any comparisons can be made.

I thought the Ferrari looked the faster race car it just happened to be that 3 key events happened in the race which helped Mercedes.

Also surely the best way to compare speed trap speeds is in quali when all cars have the same tyres, fuel loads and DRS. In the race all these variables can be different and with slipstream.

Indeed, meaningless comparing a Hamilton on softs vs Vettel on mediums for fastest laps.

The comparison I find interesting is when they both ran mediums. Hamilton was 16 laps lighter but Vettel was averaging over 1 second per lap quicker. Hamilton was in the mid 25's with a few laps in the 26's. Vettel was in the mid 24's with a few laps in the low 24's. Not sure how meaningful that is as you can't be sure how much they were pushing at this phase.

http://en.mclarenf-1.com/index.php?page ... n%20Vettel

Zoue wrote:

lamo wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:Do you know which part of the race those fastest laps was set? What about fuel loads and tyres? You need to know all this information before any comparisons can be made.

I thought the Ferrari looked the faster race car it just happened to be that 3 key events happened in the race which helped Mercedes.

Also surely the best way to compare speed trap speeds is in quali when all cars have the same tyres, fuel loads and DRS. In the race all these variables can be different and with slipstream.

Indeed, meaningless comparing a Hamilton on softs vs Vettel on mediums for fastest laps.

The comparison I find interesting is when they both ran mediums. Hamilton was 16 laps lighter but Vettel was averaging over 1 second per lap quicker. Hamilton was in the mid 25's with a few laps in the 26's. Vettel was in the mid 24's with a few laps in the low 24's. Not sure how meaningful that is as you can't be sure how much they were pushing at this phase.

http://en.mclarenf-1.com/index.php?page ... n%20Vettel

Did Vettel never use Softs, then? I must have been viewing a different race.

Zoue wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:Do you know which part of the race those fastest laps was set? What about fuel loads and tyres? You need to know all this information before any comparisons can be made.

I thought the Ferrari looked the faster race car it just happened to be that 3 key events happened in the race which helped Mercedes.

Also surely the best way to compare speed trap speeds is in quali when all cars have the same tyres, fuel loads and DRS. In the race all these variables can be different and with slipstream.

They can indeed. However, when discussing race pace surely it would seem sensible to look at the pace in the actual race, rather than try to use figures from qualifying?

Zoue wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:Do you know which part of the race those fastest laps was set? What about fuel loads and tyres? You need to know all this information before any comparisons can be made.

I thought the Ferrari looked the faster race car it just happened to be that 3 key events happened in the race which helped Mercedes.

Also surely the best way to compare speed trap speeds is in quali when all cars have the same tyres, fuel loads and DRS. In the race all these variables can be different and with slipstream.

They can indeed. However, when discussing race pace surely it would seem sensible to look at the pace in the actual race, rather than try to use figures from qualifying?

lamo wrote:

Zoue wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:Do you know which part of the race those fastest laps was set? What about fuel loads and tyres? You need to know all this information before any comparisons can be made.

I thought the Ferrari looked the faster race car it just happened to be that 3 key events happened in the race which helped Mercedes.

Also surely the best way to compare speed trap speeds is in quali when all cars have the same tyres, fuel loads and DRS. In the race all these variables can be different and with slipstream.

They can indeed. However, when discussing race pace surely it would seem sensible to look at the pace in the actual race, rather than try to use figures from qualifying?

Which is more reliable, Alonso's race top speed or his qualifying one? I believe somebody said he recorded the 4th highest top speed in the race, why do you think he was able to do that?

F1_Ernie wrote:

Zoue wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:Do you know which part of the race those fastest laps was set? What about fuel loads and tyres? You need to know all this information before any comparisons can be made.

I thought the Ferrari looked the faster race car it just happened to be that 3 key events happened in the race which helped Mercedes.

Also surely the best way to compare speed trap speeds is in quali when all cars have the same tyres, fuel loads and DRS. In the race all these variables can be different and with slipstream.

They can indeed. However, when discussing race pace surely it would seem sensible to look at the pace in the actual race, rather than try to use figures from qualifying?

How can race pace be compared when Vettel and Hamilton used different compounds at different times? Different fuel loads and more grip at the end of the race. To many factors to second guess. Both cars was very equal in the first stint between Hamilton and Vettel.

Zoue wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:

Zoue wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:Do you know which part of the race those fastest laps was set? What about fuel loads and tyres? You need to know all this information before any comparisons can be made.

I thought the Ferrari looked the faster race car it just happened to be that 3 key events happened in the race which helped Mercedes.

Also surely the best way to compare speed trap speeds is in quali when all cars have the same tyres, fuel loads and DRS. In the race all these variables can be different and with slipstream.

They can indeed. However, when discussing race pace surely it would seem sensible to look at the pace in the actual race, rather than try to use figures from qualifying?

How can race pace be compared when Vettel and Hamilton used different compounds at different times? Different fuel loads and more grip at the end of the race. To many factors to second guess. Both cars was very equal in the first stint between Hamilton and Vettel.

But one variable you resolutely cling to is qualifying, irrespective of which part of the race we are discussing? This makes more sense to you?

Zoue wrote:

lamo wrote:

Zoue wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:Do you know which part of the race those fastest laps was set? What about fuel loads and tyres? You need to know all this information before any comparisons can be made.

I thought the Ferrari looked the faster race car it just happened to be that 3 key events happened in the race which helped Mercedes.

Also surely the best way to compare speed trap speeds is in quali when all cars have the same tyres, fuel loads and DRS. In the race all these variables can be different and with slipstream.

They can indeed. However, when discussing race pace surely it would seem sensible to look at the pace in the actual race, rather than try to use figures from qualifying?

Which is more reliable, Alonso's race top speed or his qualifying one? I believe somebody said he recorded the 4th highest top speed in the race, why do you think he was able to do that?

When discussing the race, race pace, of course. How is this even a question?

Some cars operate better on full tanks, some on empty. Turning down the engine and judicious use of ERS has already been explained, as has tyres. Yet you would discard all of this in favour of the fact that if a car is faster through the speed trap in qualifying it must be faster during the race?

lamo wrote:

Zoue wrote:

lamo wrote:

Zoue wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:Do you know which part of the race those fastest laps was set? What about fuel loads and tyres? You need to know all this information before any comparisons can be made.

I thought the Ferrari looked the faster race car it just happened to be that 3 key events happened in the race which helped Mercedes.

Also surely the best way to compare speed trap speeds is in quali when all cars have the same tyres, fuel loads and DRS. In the race all these variables can be different and with slipstream.

They can indeed. However, when discussing race pace surely it would seem sensible to look at the pace in the actual race, rather than try to use figures from qualifying?

Which is more reliable, Alonso's race top speed or his qualifying one? I believe somebody said he recorded the 4th highest top speed in the race, why do you think he was able to do that?

When discussing the race, race pace, of course. How is this even a question?

Some cars operate better on full tanks, some on empty. Turning down the engine and judicious use of ERS has already been explained, as has tyres. Yet you would discard all of this in favour of the fact that if a car is faster through the speed trap in qualifying it must be faster during the race?

We were discussing top speeds. Notice the bolded quote.

Which is a more reliable and representative top speed figure. Alonso's qualifying top speed or race one?

Zoue wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:Qualifying is the only time when all things are equal. Same tyres, temps, DRS etc. It's the best time to compare speed trap speeds.

In the race we have DRS, fuel loads, tyre wear, tyre compound, circuit grip etc. Just too many variables. Alonso being 4th just explains it all.

I don't see how some people can't understand this. It's like Alonso getting DRS, slipstream, soft tyres, low fuel and comparing it to Hamilton on mediums and having no DRS and slipstream. Alonso has the faster speed trap time so let's say his car was faster.

lamo wrote:

Zoue wrote: I know what we were discussing, thanks. Top speed was part of it, as was overall pace. But every time what happens in the race is more relevant than qualifying. Hell, even track temperatures can influence a car's behaviour, but you're going to cling to times set the previous day as the only barometer of a car's performance? Please

Firstly I'll answer that question.

Quite clearly not as I mentioned in the other thread many variables at play in the race "Also, top speed will also be reliant on tyre life and last corner exit at most tracks;
-new tyres
-soft compound
- late in race (lighter car)
- slipstream length"

You always ignore any question asked of you in a discussion... Now everybody, 3rd time lucky and of asking it. Will Zoue answer this time...

Which is a more reliable and representative top speed figure. Alonso's qualifying top speed or race one?

lamo wrote:

F1_Ernie wrote:Qualifying is the only time when all things are equal. Same tyres, temps, DRS etc. It's the best time to compare speed trap speeds.

In the race we have DRS, fuel loads, tyre wear, tyre compound, circuit grip etc. Just too many variables. Alonso being 4th just explains it all.

I don't see how some people can't understand this. It's like Alonso getting DRS, slipstream, soft tyres, low fuel and comparing it to Hamilton on mediums and having no DRS and slipstream. Alonso has the faster speed trap time so let's say his car was faster.

They can understand it, they just have trouble ceding the smallest of points in a discussion

Zoue wrote:

lamo wrote:

Zoue wrote: I know what we were discussing, thanks. Top speed was part of it, as was overall pace. But every time what happens in the race is more relevant than qualifying. Hell, even track temperatures can influence a car's behaviour, but you're going to cling to times set the previous day as the only barometer of a car's performance? Please

Firstly I'll answer that question.

Quite clearly not as I mentioned in the other thread many variables at play in the race "Also, top speed will also be reliant on tyre life and last corner exit at most tracks;
-new tyres
-soft compound
- late in race (lighter car)
- slipstream length"

You always ignore any question asked of you in a discussion... Now everybody, 3rd time lucky and of asking it. Will Zoue answer this time...

Which is a more reliable and representative top speed figure. Alonso's qualifying top speed or race one?

I have answered it. Why are you making things up?

Figures taken during a race are more reliable and representative than figures taken during qualifying when discussing relative performance during a race. Is this simple enough for even you to understand?

Zoue wrote:Here are sector times for the race. Lewis was fastest in all sectors, and by some margin. S2 and S3 in particular he was miles ahead of anyone. If he'd hooked up all three sectors his ultimate race lap would have been 1:21.871, while Seb's would have been 1:23.140. That's a potential difference of 1.269 seconds. It's difficult for me to see how anyone would conclude the Ferrari was the faster car.

SmoothRide wrote:

Zoue wrote:Here are sector times for the race. Lewis was fastest in all sectors, and by some margin. S2 and S3 in particular he was miles ahead of anyone. If he'd hooked up all three sectors his ultimate race lap would have been 1:21.871, while Seb's would have been 1:23.140. That's a potential difference of 1.269 seconds. It's difficult for me to see how anyone would conclude the Ferrari was the faster car.

Those are really big gaps! Though to be fair, it didn't seem like Mercedes could maintain such a staggering pace over the long run. Based on practice times, I thought they were way ahead, but Ferrari made a great comeback. Or at least Vettel did. Kimi did not get a chance to show his pace (although he made at least one fan happy with a meeting and photo-op). I think that Ferrari is a slightly faster car in race trim at the moment given that Vettel easily lost 10+ seconds with Bottas slowing him down and the (un)timely deployment of the virtual safety car. We finally have a competitive season on our hands... I don't think the rules are perfect, not without putting a premium on mechanical grip, there is much work to be done, but durable tires coupled with well-placed DRS zones seem to be working at a basic level at least.

SmoothRide wrote:

Zoue wrote:Here are sector times for the race. Lewis was fastest in all sectors, and by some margin. S2 and S3 in particular he was miles ahead of anyone. If he'd hooked up all three sectors his ultimate race lap would have been 1:21.871, while Seb's would have been 1:23.140. That's a potential difference of 1.269 seconds. It's difficult for me to see how anyone would conclude the Ferrari was the faster car.

Those are really big gaps! Though to be fair, it didn't seem like Mercedes could maintain such a staggering pace over the long run. Based on practice times, I thought they were way ahead, but Ferrari made a great comeback. Or at least Vettel did. Kimi did not get a chance to show his pace (although he made at least one fan happy with a meeting and photo-op). I think that Ferrari is a slightly faster car in race trim at the moment given that Vettel easily lost 10+ seconds with Bottas slowing him down and the (un)timely deployment of the virtual safety car. We finally have a competitive season on our hands... I don't think the rules are perfect, not without putting a premium on mechanical grip, there is much work to be done, but durable tires coupled with well-placed DRS zones seem to be working at a basic level at least.

davidheath461 wrote:

SmoothRide wrote:

Zoue wrote:Here are sector times for the race. Lewis was fastest in all sectors, and by some margin. S2 and S3 in particular he was miles ahead of anyone. If he'd hooked up all three sectors his ultimate race lap would have been 1:21.871, while Seb's would have been 1:23.140. That's a potential difference of 1.269 seconds. It's difficult for me to see how anyone would conclude the Ferrari was the faster car.

Those are really big gaps! Though to be fair, it didn't seem like Mercedes could maintain such a staggering pace over the long run. Based on practice times, I thought they were way ahead, but Ferrari made a great comeback. Or at least Vettel did. Kimi did not get a chance to show his pace (although he made at least one fan happy with a meeting and photo-op). I think that Ferrari is a slightly faster car in race trim at the moment given that Vettel easily lost 10+ seconds with Bottas slowing him down and the (un)timely deployment of the virtual safety car. We finally have a competitive season on our hands... I don't think the rules are perfect, not without putting a premium on mechanical grip, there is much work to be done, but durable tires coupled with well-placed DRS zones seem to be working at a basic level at least.

Pointless comparison from Zoue considering that Hamilton went on to the soft (faster tyre) for the final stint (when he was on his lightest fuel load), whereas Vettel did not. Comparing fastest laps has always been pointless in the non-refuelling era.

bonecrasher wrote:

davidheath461 wrote:

SmoothRide wrote:

Zoue wrote:Here are sector times for the race. Lewis was fastest in all sectors, and by some margin. S2 and S3 in particular he was miles ahead of anyone. If he'd hooked up all three sectors his ultimate race lap would have been 1:21.871, while Seb's would have been 1:23.140. That's a potential difference of 1.269 seconds. It's difficult for me to see how anyone would conclude the Ferrari was the faster car.

Those are really big gaps! Though to be fair, it didn't seem like Mercedes could maintain such a staggering pace over the long run. Based on practice times, I thought they were way ahead, but Ferrari made a great comeback. Or at least Vettel did. Kimi did not get a chance to show his pace (although he made at least one fan happy with a meeting and photo-op). I think that Ferrari is a slightly faster car in race trim at the moment given that Vettel easily lost 10+ seconds with Bottas slowing him down and the (un)timely deployment of the virtual safety car. We finally have a competitive season on our hands... I don't think the rules are perfect, not without putting a premium on mechanical grip, there is much work to be done, but durable tires coupled with well-placed DRS zones seem to be working at a basic level at least.

Pointless comparison from Zoue considering that Hamilton went on to the soft (faster tyre) for the final stint (when he was on his lightest fuel load), whereas Vettel did not. Comparing fastest laps has always been pointless in the non-refuelling era.

Indeed! I don't know how someone well versed in the nuances of F1 could ignore this very important factor. Wilful ignorance perhaps? One does need to consider that Vettel used the faster tyre when the car was heavier so he couldn't set times as fast as Hamilton's, nor could he later on when the car was lighter as by then bel was on the slower tyre. If they both had mirrored each other's strategy then we could make representative comparisons.

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote: I said the Ferrari seemed slower down the straight, which was supported by the video feed, especially when comparing the two overtakes. This seems to bother you unduly.

Because I couldn't equate that with the Ferrari being quicker down the straight in qualifying, maybe you see that as quite a simplistic view given your detailed reasoning of how cars can be different in the race than qualifying even though the teams can change nothing on the cars between qualifying and the race.

So I just can't get my head around what you are saying and feel more comfortable with the reasoning that Hamilton simply was able to carry more exit speed relative to the car in front when comparing the two overtakes.

Either you just can't resist the urge to be sarcastic and just do it anyway regardless of content, or you genuinely have a complete lack of understanding that the drivers have control over engine modes and where to use the ERS, as I've just explained to you. So which is it?

You think I was being sarcastic, that's me done with this discussion.

genuine question. Clearly if you are not being sarcastic then you genuinely do not understand that qualifying and the race may be different, which I have to say surprises me, given your depth of interest in motorsport.

Here are speed trap figures for the race. Note how the Ferrari isn't listed above the Mercedes:

Code: Select all

1 19 F. MASSA 339.6 15:36:45
2 8 R. GROSJEAN 338.9 14:58:14
3 44 L. HAMILTON 338.4 14:59:47
4 18 L. STROLL 335.0 14:07:57
5 5 S. VETTEL 334.9 14:36:40

So can we please stop using qualifying figures to dispute race pace?

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote: Because I couldn't equate that with the Ferrari being quicker down the straight in qualifying, maybe you see that as quite a simplistic view given your detailed reasoning of how cars can be different in the race than qualifying even though the teams can change nothing on the cars between qualifying and the race.

So I just can't get my head around what you are saying and feel more comfortable with the reasoning that Hamilton simply was able to carry more exit speed relative to the car in front when comparing the two overtakes.

Either you just can't resist the urge to be sarcastic and just do it anyway regardless of content, or you genuinely have a complete lack of understanding that the drivers have control over engine modes and where to use the ERS, as I've just explained to you. So which is it?

You think I was being sarcastic, that's me done with this discussion.

genuine question. Clearly if you are not being sarcastic then you genuinely do not understand that qualifying and the race may be different, which I have to say surprises me, given your depth of interest in motorsport.

Here are speed trap figures for the race. Note how the Ferrari isn't listed above the Mercedes:

Code: Select all

1 19 F. MASSA 339.6 15:36:45
2 8 R. GROSJEAN 338.9 14:58:14
3 44 L. HAMILTON 338.4 14:59:47
4 18 L. STROLL 335.0 14:07:57
5 5 S. VETTEL 334.9 14:36:40

So can we please stop using qualifying figures to dispute race pace?

Yes that's all I was saying is that I don't fully understand, I respect the effort you have put into this although I'm still confused, I'm not actually saying outright that you are wrong.

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote: Either you just can't resist the urge to be sarcastic and just do it anyway regardless of content, or you genuinely have a complete lack of understanding that the drivers have control over engine modes and where to use the ERS, as I've just explained to you. So which is it?

You think I was being sarcastic, that's me done with this discussion.

genuine question. Clearly if you are not being sarcastic then you genuinely do not understand that qualifying and the race may be different, which I have to say surprises me, given your depth of interest in motorsport.

Here are speed trap figures for the race. Note how the Ferrari isn't listed above the Mercedes:

Code: Select all

1 19 F. MASSA 339.6 15:36:45
2 8 R. GROSJEAN 338.9 14:58:14
3 44 L. HAMILTON 338.4 14:59:47
4 18 L. STROLL 335.0 14:07:57
5 5 S. VETTEL 334.9 14:36:40

So can we please stop using qualifying figures to dispute race pace?

Yes that's all I was saying is that I don't fully understand, I respect the effort you have put into this although I'm still confused, I'm not actually saying outright that you are wrong.

Fair enough I misunderstood, sorry

GingerFurball wrote:Christ you guys are tedious.